Method and device for evaluating assemblability and reverse assemblability

ABSTRACT

With respect to a plurality of evaluation items for evaluating assemblability of an evaluation-target product, assemblability evaluation information as to the evaluation-target product is entered and an assemblability evaluation is performed based on the entered assemblability evaluation information. Simultaneously with the assemblability evaluation, a reverse-assemblability evaluation is performed based on reverse-assemblability evaluation information which is among the entered assemblability evaluation information and which is usable for evaluation items for performing the reverse-assemblability evaluation.

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

1. Field of the Invention

The present invention relates to an assemblability andreverse-assemblability evaluating method and apparatus forsimultaneously evaluating the assemblability of evaluation targetsincluding, for example, at least one component, composite products inwhich a plurality of components are combined together, semifinishedproducts in which a plurality of components are assembled together, andfinished products, and the reverse assemblability including at leastdisassemblability, classifiability, reusability, and safety of theevaluation targets.

2. Description of Related Art

As this type of evaluation method, conventionally, there has beenavailable, for example, an evaluation method in which a commercialproduct is evaluated in terms of producibility at its design stage sothat its components evaluated with low scores are found out. Also,independently of this method, a reusability evaluation method fordesigns taking into account the recent year's recyclability has alsobegun to be developed.

However, there has conventionally been available no method forsimultaneously evaluating producibility and recyclability, and moreoverfor exploiting the evaluation for design improvement.

Therefore, as a conventional practice, data is entered into and used invarious data evaluation units for assemblability evaluation of aproduct. Further, the data that has once been used for the evaluation ofassemblability has been re-entered into evaluation units for evaluationof recyclability of the product, which has been troublesome. Also, someproducts involve evaluating assemblability and reusability independentlyof each other. Such independent evaluation makes it impossible todetermine, in a single evaluation, whether the recyclability can beimproved when the assemblability is improved. Therefore, it is necessaryto re-enter, after the assemblability has been improved, data to theevaluation apparatus with respect to the reusability, and re-evaluatethe reusability. In such a case, the reusability may become much worse,while the assemblability has been improved. This would give rise tobalancing improvement in assemblability and reusability by relying ontrial and error or an operator's experience. Thus, it has been quitedifficult to simultaneously improve both assemblability and reusability.

Therefore, an object of the present invention is to solve these andother issues and to provide an assemblability and areverse-assemblability evaluating method and apparatus capable ofsimultaneously evaluating assemblability including producibility andreverse assemblability including recyclability.

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

In order to achieve the above object, the present invention has thefollowing constitutions.

According to a first aspect of the present invention, there is providedan assemblability and reverse-assemblability evaluating method,comprising: with respect to a plurality of evaluation items forevaluating assemblability of an evaluation-target product, enteringassemblability evaluation information as to the evaluation-targetproduct; and performing assemblability evaluation based on the enteredassemblability evaluation information and, simultaneously, performingreverse-assemblability evaluation based on reverse-assemblabilityevaluation information which is among the entered assemblabilityevaluation information and which is usable for evaluation items forperforming the reverse-assemblability evaluation.

According to a second aspect of the present invention, there is providedan assemblability and reverse-assemblability evaluating method asdescribed in the first aspect, wherein the method comprises: withrespect to a plurality of evaluation items for evaluating the reverseassemblability of the evaluation-target product, further enteringreverse-assemblability evaluation information as to theevaluation-target product; and performing the assemblability evaluationbased on the entered assemblability evaluation information and,simultaneously, performing the reverse-assemblability evaluation basedon the reverse-assemblability evaluation information as well as on theentered reverse-assemblability evaluation information which is among theentered assemblability evaluation information and which is usable forthe evaluation items for, evaluating the, reverse-assemblabilityevaluation.

According to a third aspect of the present invention, there is providedan, assemblability and reverse-assemblability evaluating method asdescribed in the first or second aspect, wherein the term,assemblability, refers to, at least, ease of production or ease ofassembly of the evaluation-target product which is a single component, acomposite product in which a plurality of components are combinedtogether, a semifinished product in which a plurality of components areassembled together, or a finished product, and the term, reverseassemblability, refers to, at least, ease of disassembly, ease ofclassification, ease of reuse, and safety.

According to a fourth aspect of the present invention, there is providedan assemblability and reverse-assemblability evaluating method asdescribed in any one of the first to third aspects, wherein enteringthe. evaluation information is implemented by entering selectionalinformation to be selected from among a plurality of answer items,numerical information to be answered by entering specific numericalvalues, and YES/NO type information to be entered as YES or NO inresponse to questions in the evaluation items with respect to theevaluation-target product, and evaluating the assemblability and thereverse assemblability based on the entered evaluation information isimplemented by giving evaluation scores for the acquired evaluationinformation to thereby simultaneously accomplish the evaluation of theassemblability and the reverse assemblability.

According to a fifth aspect of the present invention, there is providedan assemblability and reverse-assemblability evaluating method asdescribed in any one of the first to fourth aspects, wherein theevaluation items for the assemblability are preparation for a basecomponent of the evaluation-target product, suppliability, holdability,assemblability, combinability, necessity or non-necessity of adjustment,component sharability, and component omittability of theevaluation-target product.

According to a sixth aspect of the present invention, there is providedan assemblability and reverse-assemblability evaluating method asdescribed in the fifth aspect, wherein as more detailed evaluation itemsfor the preparation of the base component, posture change of the basecomponent, and necessity or non-necessity of any special jig for thebase component are evaluated; as more detailed evaluation items for thesuppliability of the evaluation-target product, at least, posture changeof the evaluation-target product, vulnerability of the evaluation-targetproduct, indefinite shape as an evaluation-target product's own shape,outline feature of the valuation-target product, and entanglement of theevaluation-target product are evaluated; as more detailed evaluationitems for the holdability, at least, necessary chuck and chuck space forholding the evaluation-target product are evaluated; as more detailedevaluation items for the assemblability, at least, positionability,direction of assembly, and stability of the evaluation-target productare evaluated; as more detailed evaluation items for the combinability,at least, number and direction of tightening screws in assembly processof the evaluation-target product, and places number and direction oftightening other than the tightening screws in the assembly process areevaluated; as a more detailed evaluation item for the necessity ornon-necessity of adjustment, at least, necessity or non-necessity ofvarious adjustments in the assembly process of the evaluation-targetproduct is evaluated; as a more detailed evaluation item for thecomponent sharability, at least, how sharability of components of theevaluation-target product is accomplished-is evaluated; and as a moredetailed evaluation item for the component omittability, at least,possibility that one of the components of the evaluation-target productcan be omitted is evaluated.

According to a seventh aspect of the present invention, there isprovided an assemblability and reverse-assemblability evaluating methodas described in any one of the first to sixth aspects, wherein theevaluation items for the reverse assemblability are disassemblability,classifiability, reusability, and safety.

According to an eighth aspect of the present invention, there isprovided an assemblability and reverse-assemblability evaluating methodas described in the seventh aspect, wherein as a more concreteevaluation item for the disassemblability is de-combinability, where asmore detailed evaluation items for the de-combinability, at least,tightening place, pre- and post-processing, combination type,combination direction, tightening screw sharability, and tighteningdirection of tightening screws are evaluated; as a more concreteevaluation item for the component reusability, possibility of reuse ofcomponents of the evaluation-target product is evaluated; as moreconcrete evaluation items for the classifiability, component weight andnumber of material types are evaluated; and as more concrete evaluationitems for the safety, at least, whether or not any harmful substance iscontained is evaluated.

According to a ninth aspect of the present invention, there is providedan assemblability and reverse-assemblability evaluating method asdescribed in any one of the first to fifth aspects, wherein theevaluation items for the assemblability are preparation for a basecomponent of the evaluation-target product, suppliability, holdability,assemblability, combinability, necessity or non-necessity of adjustment,component sharability and component omittability of theevaluation-target product, where as more detailed evaluation items forthe preparation for the base component, posture change of the basecomponent, and necessity or non-necessity of any special jig for thebase component are evaluated; as more detailed evaluation items for thesuppliability of the evaluation-target product, at least, posture changeof the evaluation-target product, vulnerability of the evaluation-targetproduct, indefinite shape as an evaluation-target product's own shape,outline characteristic of the evaluation-target product, andentanglement of the evaluation-target product are evaluated; as moredetailed evaluation items for the holdability, at least, necessarychucks and chuck space for holding the evaluation-target product areevaluated; as more detailed evaluation items for the assemblability, atleast, positionability, direction of assembly, and stability of theevaluation-target product are evaluated; as more detailed evaluationitems for the combinability, at least, number and direction oftightening screws in assembly process of the evaluation-target product,and places number and direction of tightening other than the tighteningscrews in the assembly process are evaluated, as a more detailedevaluation item for the necessity or non-necessity of adjustment, atleast, necessity or non-necessity of various adjustments in the assemblyprocess of the evaluation-target product is evaluated; as a moredetailed evaluation item for the component sharability, at least, howsharability of components of the evaluation-target product isaccomplished is evaluated; and as a more detailed evaluation item forthe component omittability, at least, possibility that one of componentsof the evaluation-target product can be omitted is evaluated, while theevaluation items for the reverse assemblability are disassemblability,classifiability, reusability, and safety, where a more concreteevaluation item for the disassemblability is de-combinability, where asmore detailed evaluation items for the de-combinability, at least,tightening place, pre- and post-processing, combination type,combination direction, tightening screw sharability, and tighteningdirection of tightening screws are evaluated; as a more concreteevaluation item for the component reusability, possibility of reuse ofcomponents of the evaluation-target product is evaluated; as moreconcrete evaluation items for the classifiability, component weight andnumber of material types are evaluated; and as a more concreteevaluation item for the safety, at least, whether or not any harmfulsubstance is contained is evaluated, and wherein: information on theevaluation items of the combinability and the component omittability isshared between the assemblability evaluation and thereverse-assemblability evaluation, information on the evaluation itemsof the component weight and the number of material types is sharedbetween the de-combinability evaluation and the classifiabilityevaluation, and information on the evaluation item of the material typeis shared between the classifiability and the safety.

According to a tenth aspect of the present invention, there is providedan assemblability and reverse-assemblability evaluating method asdescribed in the fifth, sixth, or ninth aspect, wherein at a time pointwhen evaluation for the evaluation-target product is done, an assemblytotal score for a component that is possible to omit is set to 0.

According to an eleventh aspect of the present invention, there isprovided an assemblability and reverse-assemblability evaluating methodas described in any one of the first to tenth aspects, wherein asresults of the assemblability and reverse-assemblability evaluation, atleast, information including at least an assemblability evaluationgraph, structural characteristics of the evaluation-target product,extraction of omittable components, and assembly man-hours can beoutputted at least in a table or graph form, and information including areverse-assembly flow chart, a reverse-assemblability evaluation graph,extraction of unnecessary-to-disassemble/reuse components,reverse-assembly man-hours, use amount of each material, and rate ofrecyclability can be outputted at least in a table or graph form.

According to a twelfth aspect of the present invention, there isprovided an assemblability and reverse-assemblability evaluatingapparatus comprising: at least, a computing unit into which assemblyinformation as to an evaluation-target product as well as information oncomponent name, assembly sequence, and quantity in number as to anevaluation-target product is entered, wherein the computing unit storesthe information in a storage unit, prepares an assembly flow chart in anassembly-flow-chart preparing section based on the information stored inthe storage unit and CAD information as to the evaluation-target productand stores the assembly flow chart into the storage unit, extracts fromthe storage unit information on assembly components, information on abase component, information on a relation between the assemblycomponents and the base component, and component detail information oncombination type out of the information prepared in the assembly flowchart preparation and stored in the storage unit, and based on theextracted information, performs the assemblability andreverse-assemblability evaluation by using at least computationalequations, evaluation criteria, evaluation scores, man-hours, andparticular-component extraction logics, necessary for the assemblabilityand reverse-assemblability evaluation which are stored in a database forthe assemblability and reverse-assemblability evaluation.

According to a thirteenth aspect of the present invention, there isprovided an assemblability and reverse-assemblability evaluatingapparatus as described in the twelfth aspect, wherein an evaluation unitcomprises an assemblability evaluation section and areverse-assemblability evaluation section, and wherein into theassemblability evaluation section, type information as to whether theevaluation-target product is a single product, a composite product, or asemifinished product, material information on those products, basecomponent information, information on suppliability of theevaluation-target product, information on holdability, information onassemblability, information on combinability, information on adjustingwork, information on sharability, and information on componentomittability is entered, based on which information the assemblabilityevaluation is executed, while into the reverse-assemblability evaluationsection, the type information as to whether the evaluation-targetproduct is a single product, a composite product, or a semifinishedproduct, the material information on those products, the information onassemblability, the information on combinability, the information onsharability, and the information on component omittability is enteredfrom the assemblability evaluation section out of the informationentered into the assemblability evaluation section, and independently ofthis, component weight information and information on reusability isentered, and based on these pieces of information, the reverseassemblability evaluation is executed.

According to a fourteenth aspect of the present invention, there isprovided an assemblability and reverse-assemblability evaluatingapparatus as described in the twelfth or thirteenth aspect, whereinresults of the evaluation in the evaluation unit are stored into thestorage unit and evaluation result information stored in the storageunit is outputted at least in a graph or table form by an output device.

According to a fifteenth aspect of the present invention, there isprovided an assemblability and reverse-assemblability evaluatingapparatus as described in any one of the twelfth to fourteenth aspects,wherein the term, assemblability, refers to, at least, ease ofproduction or ease of assembly of the evaluation-target product which isa single component, a composite product in which a plurality ofcomponents are combined together, a semifinished product in which aplurality of components are assembled together, or a finished product,and the term, reverse assemblability, refers to, at least,disassemblability, classifiability, reusability, and safety.

According to a sixteenth aspect of the present invention, there isprovided an assemblability and reverse-assemblability evaluatingapparatus as described in any one of the twelfth to fifteenth aspects,wherein entering the evaluation information is implemented by enteringselectional information to be selected from among a plurality of answeritems, numerical information to be answered by entering specificnumerical values, and YES/NO type information to be entered as YES or NOin response to questions in the evaluation items with respect to theevaluation-target product, and evaluating the assemblability and thereverse assemblability based on the entered evaluation information isimplemented by giving evaluation scores for the acquired evaluationinformation to thereby simultaneously accomplish the evaluation of theassemblability and the reverse assemblability.

According to a seventeenth aspect of the present invention, there isprovided an assemblability and reverse-assemblability evaluatingapparatus as described in any one of the twelfth to sixteenth aspects,wherein the evaluation items for the assemblability are preparation forthe base component of the evaluation-target product, suppliability,holdability, assemblability, combinability, necessity or non-necessityof adjustment, component sharability, and component omittability of theevaluation-target product.

According to an eighteenth aspect of the present invention, there isprovided an assemblability and reverse-assemblability evaluatingapparatus as described in the seventeenth aspect, wherein as moredetailed evaluation items for the preparation of the base component,posture change of the base component, and necessity or non-necessity ofany special jig for the base component are evaluated; as more detailedevaluation items for the suppliability of the evaluation-target product,at least, posture change of the evaluation-target product, vulnerabilityof the evaluation-target product, indefinite shape as anevaluation-target product's own shape, outline feature of theevaluation-target product, and entanglement of the evaluation-targetproduct are evaluated; as more detailed evaluation items for theholdability, at least, necessary chuck and chuck space for holding theevaluation-target product are evaluated; as more detailed evaluationitems for the assemblability, at least, positionability, direction ofassembly, and stability of the evaluation-target product are evaluated;as more detailed evaluation items for the combinability, at least,number and direction of tightening screws in assembly process of theevaluation-target product, and number and direction of tightening placesother than the tightening screws in the assembly process are evaluated;as a more detailed evaluation item for the necessity or non-necessity ofadjustment, at least, necessity or non-necessity of various adjustmentsin the assembly process of the evaluation-target product is evaluated;as a more detailed evaluation item for the component sharability, atleast, how sharability of components of the evaluation-target product isaccomplished; and as a more detailed evaluation item for the componentomittability, at least, possibility that components of theevaluation-target product can be omitted is evaluated.

According to a nineteenth aspect of the present invention, there isprovided an assemblability and reverse-assemblability evaluatingapparatus as described in any one of the twelfth to eighteenth aspects,wherein the evaluation items for the reverse assemblability aredisassemblability, classifiability, reusability, and safety.

According to a twentieth aspect of the present invention, there isprovided an assemblability and reverse-assemblability evaluatingapparatus as described in the nineteenth aspect, wherein a more concreteevaluation item for the disassemblability is de-combinability, where asmore detailed evaluation items for the de-combinability, at least,tightening place, pre- and post-processing, combination type,combination direction, tightening screw sharability, and tighteningdirection of tightening screws are evaluated; as a more concreteevaluation item for the component reusability, possibility of reuse ofcomponents of the evaluation-target product is evaluated; as moreconcrete evaluation items for the classifiability, component weight andnumber of material types are evaluated; and as a more concreteevaluation item for the safety, at least, whether or not any harmfulsubstance is contained is evaluated.

According to a twenty-first aspect of the present invention, there isprovided an assemblability and reverse-assemblability evaluatingapparatus as described in any one of the twelfth to sixteenth aspects,wherein the evaluation items for the assemblability are preparation forthe base component of the evaluation-target product, suppliability,holdability, assemblability, combinability, necessity or non-necessityof adjustment, component sharability, and component omittability of theevaluation-target product, where as more detailed evaluation items forthe preparation for the base component, posture change of the basecomponent, and necessity or non-necessity of any special jig for thebase component are evaluated; as more detailed evaluation items for thesuppliability of the evaluation-target product, at least, posture changeof the evaluation-target product, vulnerability of the evaluation-targetproduct, indefinite shape as an evaluation-target product's own shape,outline feature of the evaluation-target product, and entanglement ofthe evaluation-target product are evaluated; as more detailed evaluationitems for the holdability, at least, necessary chucks and chuck spacefor holding the evaluation-target product are evaluated; as moredetailed evaluation items for the assemblability, at least,positionability, direction of assembly, and stability of theevaluation-target product are evaluated; as more detailed evaluationitems for the combinability, at least, number and direction oftightening. screws in assembly process of the evaluation-target product,and number and direction of tightening places other than the tighteningscrews in the assembly process are evaluated; as a more detailedevaluation item for the necessity or non-necessity of adjustment, atleast, necessity or non-necessity of various adjustments in the assemblyprocess of the evaluation-target product is evaluated; as a moredetailed evaluation item for the component sharability, at least, howsharability of components of the evaluation-target product isaccomplished is evaluated; and as a more detailed evaluation item forthe component omittability, at least, possibility that components of theevaluation-target product can be omitted is evaluated, while theevaluation items for the reverse assemblability are disassemblability,classifiability, reusability, and safety, where a more concreteevaluation item for the disassemblability is de-combinability, where asmore detailed evaluation items for the de-combinability, at least,tightening place, pre- and post-processing, combination type,combination direction, tightening screw sharability, and tighteningdirection of tightening screws are evaluated; as a more concreteevaluation item for the component reusability, possibility of reuse ofcomponents of the evaluation-target product is evaluated; as moreconcrete evaluation items for the classifiability, component weight andnumber of material types are evaluated; and as a more concreteevaluation item for the safety, at least, whether or not any harmfulsubstance is contained is evaluated, and wherein: information on theevaluation items of combinability and the component omittability isshared between the assemblability evaluation and thereverse-assemblability evaluation, information on the evaluation itemsof the component weight and the number of material types is sharedbetween the de-combinability evaluation and the classifiabilityevaluation, and information on the evaluation item of the material typeis shared between the classifiability and the safety.

According to a twenty-second aspect of the present invention, there isprovided an assemblability and reverse-assemblability evaluatingapparatus as described in the thirteenth, seventeenth, eighteenth, ortwenty-first aspect, wherein at a time point when evaluation for theevaluation-target product is done, an assembly total score for acomponent that is possible to omit is set to 0.

According to a twenty-third aspect of the present invention, there isprovided an assemblability and reverse-assemblability evaluatingapparatus as described in any one of the twelfth to twenty-secondaspects, wherein as results of the assemblability andreverse-assemblability evaluation, at least, information including atleast an assemblability evaluation graph, structural characteristics ofthe evaluation-target product, extraction of omittable components, andassembly man-hours can be outputted by the output device at least in atable or graph form, and information including at least areverse-assembly flow chart, a reverse-assemblability evaluation graph,extraction of unnecessary-to-disassemble/reuse components,reverse-assembly man-hours, use amount of each material, and rate ofrecyclability can be outputted by the output device at least in a tableor graph form.

With the above constitution, if evaluation items are selected based onthe work of actual an assembly process, the operator (e.g., designer)enters information on the evaluation items directly to the evaluationapparatus based on actual assembly work. On the other hand, it can beseen that, assuming that the reverse-assembly process, such asdisassembly for which the reverse assemblability such as reusability, isevaluated as a reverse flow to the above assembly process, the reverseassemblability is automatically evaluated while the information for theevaluation of the reverse assemblability, which is unknown from theassemblability, can be entered into the evaluation apparatus. As aresult, the operator is enabled to enter information with betterunderstanding of the assembly and the reverse-assembly work such asdisassembly, which helps the operator to concretely find out improvementproposals for both assemblability and reverse assemblability.

With respect-to evaluation-target products, without being limited tofinished products, the evaluation unit may be set as a unit product(semifinished product), a composite product made up of a plurality ofcomponents, and one component, in which case an operator, such as adesigner or production line worker, is able to evaluate theassemblability and the reverse assemblability in such a unit that ismade closest to the form in which finished products, semifinishedproducts, and components are recognized. With respect to comparisonsbetween an operator's company's new products, and conventional productsas well as comparisons with competitive company's products,assemblability and reverse assemblability can be relatively evaluated insuch levels as product level, semifinished product level, and componentlevel.

In conventional evaluation of assemblability, there are many cases whereonly design information such as “positional relation of components” and“tightening means” are taken as evaluation items. However, in suchcases, although entry is simple (or can be automatically achieved bydirect coupling with a CAD (Computer Aided Design) system), there is agap from assemblability in actual assembly. As such, the evaluationaccuracy is sacrificed. In contrast to this, in the method and apparatusof the present invention, evaluation items representing actual assemblysuch as “posture change” and “holdability” enable setting and entry ofinformation on assemblability and the like. Consequently, the operatorentry is aided, and assemblability and reverse assemblability can beevaluated with higher accuracy.

Further, if the operator enters information into the evaluationapparatus in response to the questions as to the evaluation items onassemblability or on assemblability and reverse assemblability, itbecomes possible to output, for example, forward and reverseassemblability evaluation scores as to assemblability and reverseassemblability, a necessary-to-improve component list, reusablecomponents, an unnecessary-to-disassemble component list, assemblyman-hours, disassembly man-hours, and the like as evaluation results ofthe assemblability and the reverse assemblability, so that theassemblability and the reverse assemblability can be evaluatedsimultaneously. That is, according to the present invention, if theassemblability and the reverse assemblability evaluation is performed,for example, at design stage, then assemblability such as producibilityas well as reverse assemblability, such as recyclability, can beevaluated simultaneously in a short time, which can lead to a designimprovement. Also, since the evaluation of the reverse assemblability isperformed principally based on information acquired on evaluation itemsrelated to the assemblability, the operator is enabled to accuratelyevaluate not only the assemblability but also the reverse assemblabilityeven if he is not so conscious of the reverse assemblability.

Also, conventionally, when the evaluation of assemblability and theevaluation of reusability are executed independently of each other, itwould be difficult to simultaneously accomplish an improvement in theevaluation of assemblability and an improvement in the evaluation ofreusability. In contrast to this, in the present invention, theevaluation of the assemblability and the evaluation of the reverseassemblability are simultaneously executed. It can be easily predictedthat, for example, if components or units, or the like, that are worsein the evaluation of the assemblability and the reverse assemblabilityare improved in terms of low scored items, then the evaluation of bothassemblability and reverse assemblability can be enhanced, so thatimprovement in both assemblability and reverse assemblability can beaccomplished easily and securely.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

These and other aspects and features of the present invention willbecome clear from the following description taken in conjunction withthe preferred embodiments thereof with reference to the accompanyingdrawings, briefly described as follows.

FIG. 1 is an explanatory diagram of a assemblability andreverse-assemblability evaluating method and apparatus for use thereof,according to an embodiment of the invention.

FIG. 2 is a comparative explanatory diagram between the assemblabilityand reverse-assemblability evaluating method and apparatus of theembodiment, and an assemblability evaluating method according to theprior art.

FIG. 3 is an explanatory diagram of an example of assemblabilityevaluation items and reverse-assemblability evaluation items in theassemblability and reverse-assemblability evaluating method andapparatus of the embodiment.

FIG. 4 is a schematic arrangement of the apparatus for carrying out theassemblability and reverse-assemblability evaluating method of theembodiment.

FIG. 5 is a schematic explanatory diagram of a flow of evaluation ofcomponents by the assemblability and reverse-assemblability evaluatingmethod and apparatus of the embodiment.

FIG. 6 is a schematic explanatory diagram of a more detailed flow ofevaluation depicted in FIG. 5.

FIG. 7 is a schematic explanatory diagram of a detailed flow of theassemblability and reverse-assemblability evaluating method with respectto a component name α in FIG. 5.

FIG. 8 is a table of evaluation results of FIG. 7.

FIG. 9 is an explanatory diagram of a case where the detailed flow ofthe assemblability and reverse-assemblability evaluating method of FIG.5 is applied to components within one unit.

FIG. 10 is an explanatory diagram showing that the evaluation of FIG. 9is performed for each of units constituting one product.

FIG. 11 is a graph of evaluation results of an example of assemblabilityevaluation items and reverse assemblability evaluation items in theassemblability and reverse-assemblability evaluating method andapparatus of the embodiment based on FIG. 3.

FIG. 12 is a graph of evaluation scores and component counts of theassemblability and reverse-assemblability evaluating method andapparatus of the embodiment based on FIG. 3.

FIG. 13 is an explanatory diagram showing that evaluation items ofassemblability and reverse assemblability can be shared in theembodiment.

FIG. 14 is a schematic diagram of an evaluation apparatus for carryingout the assemblability and reverse-assemblability evaluating method ofthe embodiment.

FIG. 15 is a detailed diagram of the arrangement of the evaluationsection of FIG. 14.

FIG. 16 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of evaluation itemsof the assemblability and reverse-assemblability evaluating method andapparatus of the embodiment.

FIG. 17 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of evaluation itemsof the assemblability and reverse-assemblability evaluating method andapparatus of the embodiment. subsequent to FIG. 16;

FIG. 18 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of evaluation itemsof the assemblability and reverse-assemblability evaluating method andapparatus of the embodiment, subsequent to FIG. 17.

FIG. 19 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of evaluation itemsof the assemblability and reverse-assemblability evaluating method andapparatus of the embodiment, subsequent to FIG. 18.

FIG. 20 is an explanatory diagram showing an example of evaluation itemsof the assemblability and reverse-assemblability evaluating method andapparatus of the embodiment, subsequent to FIG. 19.

FIG. 21 is an operational flow chart of the assemblability andreverse-assemblability evaluating method and apparatus of theembodiment.

FIG. 22 is an explanatory diagram showing a modification of theevaluation items of the assemblability and reverse-assemblabilityevaluating method and apparatus of the embodiment of FIGS. 16 to 20.

FIG. 23 depicts an evaluation input sheet of an assemblability andreverse assemblability (forward/reverse assemblability) evaluation sheet(component evaluation table) in a case where the assemblability andreverse-assemblability evaluating method of the embodiment is applied toa washing machine as an example of the evaluation target.

FIG. 24 depicts an evaluation input sheet of the assemblability andreverse-assemblability (forward/reverse assemblability) evaluation sheet(component evaluation table), subsequent to FIG. 23.

FIG. 25 depicts another evaluation input sheet of the assemblability andreverse-assemblability (forward/reverse assemblability) evaluationsheets (component evaluation table).

FIG. 26 depicts an evaluation input sheet of the assemblability andreverse-assemblability (forward/reverse assemblability) evaluation sheet(component evaluation table), subsequent to FIG. 25.

FIG. 27 depicts another evaluation input sheet of the assemblability andreverse-assemblability (forward/reverse assemblability) evaluation sheet(component evaluation table).

FIG. 28 depicts an assemblability evaluation input sheet of anassemblability and reverse-assemblability (forward/reverseassemblability) evaluation sheet (component evaluation table) in a casewhere the assemblability and reverse-assemblability evaluating method ofthe embodiment is applied to a washing machine as an example of theevaluation target as shown in FIGS. 23 to 27.

FIG. 29 depicts another reverse-assemblability evaluation sheet of theassemblability and reverse-assemblability (forward/reverseassemblability) evaluation sheet (component evaluation table).

FIG. 30 depicts still another reverse-assemblability evaluation sheet ofthe assemblability and reverse-assemblability (forward/reverseassemblability) evaluation sheet (component evaluation table).

FIG. 31 depicts showing a reverse-assemblability evaluation sheet of theassemblability and reverse-assemblability (forward/reverseassemblability) evaluation sheet (component evaluation table),subsequent to FIG. 30.

FIG. 32 depicts showing another reverse-assemblability evaluation sheetof the assemblability and reverse-assemblability (forward/reverseassemblability) evaluation sheet (component evaluation table).

FIG. 33 depicts a reverse-assemblability evaluation sheet of theassemblability and reverse-assemblability (forward/reverseassemblability) evaluation sheet (component evaluation table),subsequent to FIG. 32.

FIG. 34 depicts another reverse-assemblability evaluation sheet of theassemblability and reverse-assemblability (forward/reverseassemblability) evaluation sheet (component evaluation table).

FIG. 35 depicts a reverse-assemblability evaluation sheet of theassemblability and reverse-assemblability (forward/reverseassemblability) evaluation sheet (component evaluation table),subsequent to FIG. 34.

FIG. 36 depicts a reverse-assemblability evaluation sheet of theassemblability and reverse-assemblability (forward/reverseassemblability) evaluation sheet (component evaluation table),subsequent to FIG. 35.

FIG. 37 depicts the positional relation between FIGS. 23 and 24.

FIG. 38 depicts the positional relation between FIGS. 25 and 26.

FIG. 39 depicts the positional relation between FIGS. 27 and 28.

FIG. 40 depicts the positional relation between FIGS. 30 and 31.

FIG. 41 depicts the positional relation between FIGS. 32 and 33.

FIG. 42 depicts the positional relation between FIGS. 34, 35, and 36.

FIG. 43 depicts the example of the assembly flow chart of theembodiment.

FIG. 44 depicts the example of the reverse-assembly flow chart of theembodiment.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

Before the description of the present invention proceeds, it is to benoted that like parts are designated by like reference numeralsthroughout the accompanying drawings.

A first embodiment of the present invention is described in detail withreference to the accompanying drawings below.

The embodiment of the present invention is described in detail based onthe accompanying drawings.

A reverse-assemblability evaluating method and an apparatus for carryingout the method are described according to the first embodiment isexplained.

The term “assemblability” herein has such a meaning as to cover the easeof production or assembly, or the like, of evaluation targets.Evaluation targets include, for example: a single-unit product (onecomponent); a composite product, which is a component aggregate formedof a plurality of components having previously been assembled with eachother into one component, and which is a component aggregate that cannotbe considered in terms of producibility etc., by evaluating itsassemblability and reverse assemblability; and a semifinished product,which is a component aggregate formed of a plurality of components beingassembled with each other and unitized, and which is a componentaggregate that can be considered in terms of producibility etc., byevaluating its assemblability and reverse assemblability, and a finishedproduct. The term “reverse assemblability” has such a meaning as tocover decomposability, classifiability, reusability, safety, or thelike.

First, the reverse-assemblability evaluating method and apparatusaccording to the first embodiment of the present invention are describedin terms of their outlined contents, way of use, and the like.

As shown in FIG. 1, generally, commercial articles (products) aremarketed for customers after design, machining, and assembly processesin factories of the manufacturing company of the products from materialpurchased from material makers. Meanwhile, products that becomeunnecessary are recovered from customers to reverse factories (thatperform reverse-assembly) and the recovered products are disassembledand taken apart, classified, and subjected to recycling process. Thoserecyclable items are then delivered to material makers and recycled.

This being the case, generally, in order to produceenvironment-friendly, highly recyclable products (commercial articles),it is necessary: (1) to establish a recovery system for used productsfor easier recovery; (2) to establish a recycling technique to provide arecycling loop (for re-use material) and a equipment technique therefor;(3) to establish an LCA (Life Cycle Assessment) with the aim ofeliminating global warming, ozonosphere destruction, air pollution, andwater: pollution; and (4) to establish an easy-to-recycle designstructure for implementation of disassembly, classification, and reuse,allowing the disassembly cost to be minimized and the disassembly to beeasily achieved.

Consequently, machinability and assemblability matter in the productionprocess of products and the running cost matters in the use process ofproducts, whereas disassemblability and classifiability matter in therecovery and disassembly processes and scrappability matter in thescrapping process. For evaluation of the above (4) easy-to-recycledesign structure, a reverse-assemblability evaluating method (or DFMR,i.e., Design For Minimum Resource through Simple Assembly andDisassembly) according to the assemblability and reverse-assemblabilityevaluating method and apparatus of this embodiment can be used toevaluate the disassemblability, classifiability, and the like in therecovery and disassembly processes. Based on this evaluation result,contribution can be made to the recyclability in the recycling processand to machinability and assemblability in the manufacturing process.

In the flow of the assemblability and reverse-assemblability evaluatingmethod according to the prior art, as shown in the left side of FIG. 2,after an assembly flow chart is prepared based on information from a CAD(Computer Aided Design) system, a comparison with competitive companies'products is made as required, and evaluation and analysis are performedfor each assembly work, by which a proposal for assemblabilityimprovement is prepared. On the other hand, as shown in the right halfof FIG. 2, in the assemblability and reverse-assemblability evaluatingmethod and apparatus according to this embodiment, after an assemblyflow chart is prepared based on information from a CAD (Computer AidedDesign) system, a comparison with competitive companies' products or theoperator's company's past products is made, as required, based on bothinformation from the CAD system and input information from the operatorwhile evaluation and analysis are performed for each assembly work, morespecifically, for each of disassembly work, material, or the like.Thereafter a proposal for assemblability improvement and creation of areverse-assembly flow chart for reverse-assembly can be achieved. Fromthis reverse-assembly flow chart and evaluation results, a proposal forreverse-assemblability improvement can also be prepared.

As shown in FIG. 3, in the assemblability and reverse-assemblabilityevaluating method and apparatus of this embodiment, for development ofan assemblability and reverse-assemblability evaluating method, inparticular, for development of the reverse-assemblability, therecyclability can be optimized-by tracing up to the design.

First, as a basic concept for the evaluation of the assemblability,three major items of product quality Q, product cost C, and productdelivery D are considered.

First, with regard to evaluation items for the quality Q, evaluation ismade as to “fewer components”, i.e. whether the number of components isa possible minimum, “less adjustment”, i.e. whether the number ofadjustment places is a possible minimum, “sharing and commonization”,i.e. whether the common components is large in number so that componentcommonization is accomplished, and “less tightening”, i.e. whether thenumber of tightening places is a possible minimum.

Next, with regard to evaluation items for the cost C, evaluation is madeas to “easy-to-assemble structure”, i.e. whether a cost reduction isachieved as an easy-to-assemble structure, “fewer components”, i.e.whether the number of components is a possible minimum so that a costreduction is achieved, “fewer man-hours”, i.e. whether the number ofassembly processes is a possible minimum so that a cost reduction isachieved, “sharing and commonization”, i.e. whether components is largein number so that component sharing is achieved, and that a costreduction is achieved, “simple tightening”, i.e. whether the possibletightenable and simple tightening means is used as tightening means sothat a cost reduction is achieved.

Further, with regard to evaluation items for the delivery D, evaluationis made as to “appropriate assembly hierarchy”, i.e. whether too manyassembly hierarchical layers are used unnecessarily (where for example,two to three hierarchical layers are ideal), and “fewer unit counts”,i.e. whether the number of units as semifinished products which arecomponent aggregates is a possible minimum.

On the other hand, as a basic concept for the evaluation of the reverseassemblability, three major items of “production with minimumresources”, “production with minimum energy consumption”, and“production without reduction of resources value” are considered.

First, with regard to evaluation items for the “production with minimumresources”, an attempt for evaluation is made as to “less componentweight”, i.e. whether component weight is reduced so that resourcesrequired for components are a possible minimum, “fewer components”, i.e.whether the number of components is a possible minimum so that resourcesrequired for components is a possible minimum, “fewer tighteningmembers”, i.e. whether tightening members are reduced as much aspossible so that resources required for the tightening members are apossible minimum, and “reusability of used components or use of recycledmaterial”, i.e. whether already used components or already recycledmaterials are large in number.

Next, with regard to evaluation items for the “production with minimumenergy consumption”, an attempt for evaluation is made as to “fewerdisassembly man-hours”, i.e. whether man-hours required for disassemblyare a possible minimum, “unnecessary-to-disassemble components”, i.e.whether components that do not need to be disassembled withconsideration given to material recycling are a possible maximum, and,as required, “power consumption”, i.e. whether power consumption of eachcomponent or the whole product is a possible minimum.

Next, with regard to evaluation items for the “production withoutreduction of resource value”, an attempt for evaluation is made as to“exclusion of harmful substances”, i.e. whether use of harmfulsubstances is suppressed as much as possible, “recyclable material”,i.e. whether recyclable material is used to a possible maximum,“reusable components”, i.e. whether recyclable components that can bereused as they are without being decomposed are used to a possiblemaximum, and, as required, “long-life design”, i.e. whether componentand product are so designed as to make their lives longest possible.

From these points of view, in the assemblability andreverse-assemblability evaluating method and apparatus of thisembodiment, specifically, as shown in FIG. 4, an assembly flow chart isprepared from component lists, and the like, of a CAD system. Then,based on information derived from this assembly, flow chart and inputinformation from the operator, the assemblability evaluation and thereverse-assemblability evaluation are simultaneously executed.

Evaluation items for the evaluation are exemplified by base components,component suppliability, assembly work, tightening types/places,sharability, and the like. Based on result information of the evaluationon these evaluation items, such information as an assemblabilityevaluation graph (to be used for extraction of hard-to-assemblecomponents), features of product structure (for example, features suchas the presence or absence of work of any separate process as can betaken out from a hierarchy of the assembly flow chart), extraction ofomittable components, and assembly man-hours can be outputted in anyarbitrary form of table or graph, or the like, by automatic processingof the evaluation apparatus. To execute the simultaneous evaluation ofthe assemblability and reverse assemblability with the same apparatus inthis manner characterizes the evaluation method and apparatus of thisembodiment.

Evaluation items for the reverse-assemblability evaluation areexemplified by material/weight of disassembly components, disassemblywork, untightening types/places and as required, preferably, harmfulsubstances. Based on result information of the evaluation on theseevaluation items, such information as a reverse-assemblability(disassembly) flow chart, a reverse-assemblability evaluation graph,extraction of unnecessary-to-disassemble/reuse components,reverse-assembly (disassembly) man-hours, use amount of each material,rate of recyclability, and the like, can be outputted in any arbitraryform of table or graph, or the like, by automatic processing of theevaluation apparatus.

In the evaluation method and apparatus in this embodiment, the generalflow of the evaluation of the assemblability and the reverseassemblability is as follows.

As shown in FIG. 21, first, at step S10, as will be described later,assembly flow information is entered into acomponent-evaluation-information computing section 8, and at step S11,the assembly flow information is stored into a storage unit 13 via thecomponent-evaluation-information computing section 8. In this process,the sequence for assembling the evaluation-target product (a singlecomponent, composite component, or semifinished product), and the like,are also stored into the storage unit 13.

Next, at step S12, information as to components, such as questions in aplurality of evaluation items, is read out from the storage unit 13component by component.

Next, at step S13, information for the evaluation, such as answers tothe questions, is entered. This process is carried out, for example, byentering, as answers to the questions, selectional information selectedfrom among a plurality of answered items corresponding to the questionsof the evaluation items, numerical information acquired by definitivelyentering numerical values, and YES/NO information acquired by enteringYES or NO, with respect to the evaluation-target product. The questionsmay be displayed on a screen of a personal computer equipped with theassemblability and reverse-assemblability evaluating apparatus so as toallow the input operator to enter answers from a keyboard or mouse, orthe like.

Based on the answers to the questions at step S13, it is decided at stepS14 whether the evaluation-target component is omittable. If thecomponent is decided as non-omittable at step S14, it is decided at stepS15 whether the component is usable for the assemblability evaluation.If the component is decided as non-usable at step S15, it is decided atstep S16 whether the component is usable for the reverse-assemblabilityevaluation. If the component is decided as non-usable at step S16, theprogram flow goes to step S17.

On the other hand, if the evaluation-target component is decided asomittable at step S14, then omittable-component information that therelevant component may be omitted is stored into the storage unit 13 atstep 18, the program then going to step S15. The storedomittable-component information will be used in a process of improvingthe assemblability evaluation and the reverse-assemblability evaluation.

Also, if the component is decided as usable for assemblabilityevaluation at step S15, then assembly evaluation information that thecomponent is usable for assemblability evaluation is stored into thestorage unit 13 at step 19, the program then going to step S16. Thestored assembly evaluation information will be used in a process of theassemblability evaluation at step S21.

Also, if the component is decided as usable for thereverse-assemblability evaluation at step S16, thenreverse-assemblability evaluation information that the component isusable for the reverse-assemblability evaluation is stored into thestorage unit 13 at step S20, the program then going to step S17. Thestored reverse-assemblability evaluation information will be used in aprocess of executing the reverse-assemblability evaluation at step S22.

At step S17, it is decided whether evaluation information for all thecomponents have been entered. If evaluation information for all thecomponents have not been entered, then the program returns to step S12.If evaluation information for all the components have been entered,assemblability evaluation is executed at step S21 based on the assemblyevaluation information stored at step S19, and assemblability evaluationresult is stored into the storage unit 13.

Next, at step S22, reverse-assemblability evaluation is executed basedon the reverse-assembly evaluation information stored at step S20, andreverse-assemblability evaluation result is stored into the storage unit13.

Next, at step S23, assemblability evaluation index or indices areevaluated based on the assemblability evaluation information stored inthe storage unit 13 at step S21, by which degree of assemblability, andthe like, are evaluated.

Next, at step S24, reverse-assemblability evaluation index or indicesare evaluated based on the reverse-assemblability evaluation informationstored in the storage unit 13 at step S22, by which disassemblability,reusability, classifiability, safety, and the like, are evaluated.

Individual operations are described in detail below.

As shown in FIG. 5, selectional information selected from among aplurality of answered items, numerical information answered byexplicitly entering numerical values, and YES/NO information acquired byentering YES or NO, are acquired from the questions of the evaluationitems with respect to, for example, one component “A” constituting acommercial product from an operator (input operator). Part of thesepieces of information may also be based on information derived from aCAD system instead of the operator's own input. For the selectionalinformation, evaluation scores are given to selected information from anevaluation criteria database by taking into consideration evaluationcriteria. For the numerical information, evaluation scores are given tothe numerical information. By taking into consideration these evaluationscores, man-hours are evaluated based on the man-hour information from aman-hour calculation database for the relevant component. Further,taking into consideration special focused points (e.g., whether therelevant component is an omittable component, anunnecessary-to-disassemble component, a recyclable component, or thelike), evaluation scores are-multiplied by the number of components tocalculate a sub-total of evaluation scores based on the YES/NOinformation. Further, also with respect to the man-hours, man-hours aremultiplied by the number of components to calculate a sub-total ofman-hours, the sub-total being stored into the storage unit 13.

An explicit example of this flow is shown in FIG. 6. In this case, as anexample, the combination type is evaluated with respect to the component“A”. As the selectional information, fit-in, caulking, solder (in thefigure, solder has been selected), welding, connectors, and the like,are presented as the selectional items. From among these items, theoperator selects a combination type for the component A. Scores arepreviously stored as the evaluation criteria database for thecombination type, for example, 10 points for fit-in, 5 points forcaulking, and 2 points for soldering. Information is previously storedas the combining man-hour calculation database, such as 1 second forfit-in, 3 seconds for caulking, and 10 seconds for soldering. The numberof tightening screws is entered as the numerical information is entered.In this example 2 is entered. In terms of necessity or non-necessity ofthe component the YES/NO information is entered. In this example, YES isentered as to component integration. In this way, the component isevaluated while the total product is also evaluated.

In FIG. 7, with respect to a component α, A is selected from among A, B,and C by selectional input as evaluation item 1, and A is given a circleby the evaluation score database while 10 man-hours are given by theman-hour database. At evaluation item 2, B is selected and a numericalvalue of 3 is entered by selectional and numerical input. As a result ofthis, two stars are acquired from the evaluation score database, while10 points are acquired from the man-hour database. At evaluation item 3,special selectional information is acquired, information as to whetherspecial flags are turned ON is entered based on some special logic, andnumbers of ON's and OFF's of the special flags are summed up,respectively. This operation is executed for all the components one byone. These evaluation items and their input information are listed as atable in FIG. 8.

Input operations as shown above are executed for each component (stepS17), results are put together for each unit formed of a plurality ofcomponents assembled together (see FIG. 9), and finally, an evaluationfor the whole product is grasped (see FIG. 10). In addition, the term“special flag” refers to, for example in FIGS. 9 and 10, a flag which isset (turned ON) in the case of a component into which a plurality ofcomponent parts can be integrated. Also in FIGS. 9 and 10, the term“problem component” refers to a component that has been evaluatedparticularly poor, where problem components can be discriminated byarbitrarily setting criteria, for example, by taking components having 0points or 10 or lower points as problem components. According to thenumbers and names of these problem components, the number of componentsrequiring improving can be determined and specified.

In the method of determining the evaluation scores for theassemblability and the reverse assemblability, the total score as theproduct can be given by determining an average score which is obtainedby summing up the scores of individual components and then dividing thesummation by the number of components, but this method has one problem.That is, this method is contradictory to the notion that “it is betterto eliminate even any highly pointed components”. This is becausereducing high scored components would cause the average score of thewhole product to be lowered. Therefore, it is recommendable, as anexample, to set the assembly total evaluation score to 0 for componentsthat may be omitted at the time when evaluation for individualcomponents has been completed. As a result of this, a contradiction that“omitting a component causes the evaluation score to be lowered” can beavoided. An explicit calculation method is as follows.$\text{Evaluation average score α} = {\{ {\frac{\Sigma}{A}\quad \text{evaluation score of~~assembly}\quad {\text{components}\text{A}\text{(number of assembly components}\text{A}\text{)}}} \}/\text{(total number of assembly components).}}$

Total evaluation index={evaluation average score Δ×(total number ofassembly components−number of omittable components)}/(total number ofassembly components).

Results of these evaluations can be outputted, for example, as shown inFIGS. 11 and 12. FIG. 11 shows evaluation at individual evaluation itemsof assemblability (Q: quality, C: cost, D: delivery) and reverseassemblability (fewer resources, less energy consumption, suppression ofresource value reduction) with respect to the evaluation items of FIG.3, assuming that the center point is assigned 0 points and the outermostperiphery is assigned 100 points, as an example. This assumption of a0-point center and a 100-point outermost periphery is intended for aneasier understanding for the evaluator, but without being limited tothese points, other points may be assigned. The bold line being a lineof mass-production permission criterion as an example, it can beunderstood that this criterion and three kinds of products, “operator'scompany's new product”, “operator's company's conventional product”, and“A company's product” can be compared with one another. In FIG. 12, thevertical axis represents the total number of components and thehorizontal axis represents the evaluation score. It can be seen that,although it is ideal that the current total number of components can beintegrated into one component, yet it is appropriate, with an aim ofhalving the total number of components for the present and with asetting of evaluation score target of 80 points or more by improving theassemblability, that the resulting score falls within a target areahatched in FIG. 12. In other words, it is appropriate to make efforts toreduce the distance from the ideal point in both vertical and horizontaldirections as much as possible.

Next, in evaluating the assemblability and the reverse assemblability,evaluation items to be used for, for example, the evaluation of thereverse assemblability when the worker enters information into theevaluation apparatus in response to the questions about the evaluationitems of the assemblability evaluation are specifically shown in FIG.13.

More specific evaluation items for the “assemblability” include“preparation for base component”, “component suppliability”,“holdability”, “combinability”, “necessity or non-necessity ofadjustment”, “component sharability”, “component omittability”, and thelike.

At least, posture change of base component(s), and necessity ornon-necessity of any special jig(s) for base component(s) are evaluatedas more detailed evaluation items for the “preparation for basecomponent”. At least, such items as change of component, componentvulnerability, indefinite shape of component's own shape, outlinecharacteristics of component, and entanglement of component areevaluated as more detailed evaluation items for the “componentsuppliability”. At least, such items as necessary chuck for holding andchuck space are evaluated as more detailed evaluation items for the“holdability”. At least, such items as positionability, direction ofassembly, and stability are evaluated as more detailed evaluation itemsfor the “assemblability”. At least, the number and direction oftightening screws in the assembly process of the evaluation-targetproduct, and the number and direction of tightening places other thanthe tightening screws in the assembly process are evaluated as moredetailed evaluation items for the “combinability”. At least, thenecessity or non-necessity of various adjustments in the assemblyprocess of the evaluation-target product is evaluated as a more detailedevaluation item for the “necessity or non-necessity of adjustment”. Atleast, how component sharability is accomplished and others is evaluatedas a more detailed evaluation item for the “component sharability”.Further, at least, the possibility that the component can be omitted by,for example, integration is evaluated as a more detailed evaluation itemfor the “component omittability”.

In contrast to the above “assemblability”, more specific evaluationitems for the “reverse-assemblability” include “disassemblability”,“classifiability”; “reusability”, “safety”, and the like.

First, a more detailed evaluation item for the “disassemblability” is“de-combinability”. Such items as tightening place, pre- andpost-processing, combination type, combination direction, tighteningscrew sharability, tightening direction of tightening screws, and thelike, are evaluated As more detailed evaluation items for the“de-combinability”.

The possibility of reuse of the component is evaluated as a moredetailed evaluation item for the “component reusability”(recyclability).

Component weight and number of component material types are evaluated asmore detailed evaluation items for the “classifiability”.

Material type, i.e., whether any harmful substance is contained, howmuch is the quantity of the harmful substance or what is the weight ofcomponents containing the harmful substance, and the like, are to beevaluated as more detailed evaluation items for the “safety”.

As shown in FIG. 13, it is expressed that between the evaluations of the“assemblability” and the “reverse assemblability”, information on theevaluation item of the “combinability” (de-combinability) can be shared.Between-the evaluations of the “disassemblability” and the“classifiability”, information on the evaluation item of the “componentweight and number of material types” can be shared. With respect to the“classifiability” and the “safety”, information on the evaluation itemof the “material type” can be shared apparently. In other words, thismeans that once information on the evaluation item of the“combinability” as an evaluation item for the assemblability isacquired, the information acquired for the “assemblability” as theevaluation item of the “combinability” can be used, as it is, for the“disassemblability” in the evaluation of the reverse assemblability.Further, once information on the evaluation item of the “componentweight and number of material types” as the “disassemblability” isacquired in the evaluation of the reverse assemblability, theinformation can be-used- for the evaluation of the “classifiability”.Further, once information on the evaluation item of the “material type”is acquired for the “classifiability”, the information can be used forthe evaluation of the “safety”. Accordingly, when both theassemblability and the reverse assemblability are simultaneouslyevaluated by associating such evaluation items with one another, inputinformation on the evaluation items of either one of the assemblabilityor the reverse assemblability, for example of the assemblability can beused also for the reverse assemblability, so that input information canbe used with high efficiency.

Arrangement of the evaluation apparatus for embodying theabove-described assemblability and reverse-assemblability evaluatingmethod according to this embodiment is shown in FIGS. 14 and 15.Referring to FIG. 14, information as to the evaluation-target product(such as one component, a composite product in which a plurality ofcomponents are integrally combined, a semifinished product in which aplurality of components are assembled together, and a finished product)3, for example, assembly information such as component name, assemblysequence, and quantity in number, is entered into thecomponent-evaluation-information computing section 8 within a computingunit 4 with the use of an input device 2 such as a keyboard or mouse byan input operator such as an evaluator, so as to be stored into thestorage unit 13. Also, part of the foregoing information as well asinformation as to drawings of the evaluation-target product 3 areentered as CAD information from a CAD system 1 into anassembly-flow-chart preparing section 7 of the computing unit 4, andbased on the CAD information, a later-described assembly flow chart isprepared in the assembly-flow-chart preparing section 7. The assemblyflow chart prepared in the assembly-flow-chart preparing section 7 isentered into the component-evaluation-information computing section 8and stored into the storage unit 13. From various types of informationstored in the storage unit 13 in this way, component detail information,for example, information as to assembly components, information as tobase components, which are components to be assembled, information as tothe relation between the assembly components and the base components(more specifically, such information as assembly component name,component number, base component name, base component number, number ofassembly components, whether the assembly component is a semifinishedproduct, and whether the posture of base components is changed),combination type, information as to wear is taken out from the storageunit 13. Based on these pieces of information, the evaluation of theassemblability and the reverse assemblability is executed by thecomponent-evaluation-information computing section 8. Also, computingequations and information necessary for the evaluation of theassemblability and the reverse assemblability, for example, evaluationcriteria, evaluation scores, man-hours, particular-component extractionlogics (a logic for, when a plurality of components made of the samematerial are assembled, evaluating whether or not any component omissionis possible by integrating the components into one component; a logicfor, when components made of the same material are assembled, making thecomponents unnecessary to disassemble, or the like) stored in anassemblability and reverse-assemblability evaluation database 9 areentered into the component-evaluation-information computing section 8 asrequired, and are used for the evaluation of the assemblability and thereverse assemblability.

As shown in FIG. 15, the component-evaluation-information computingsection 8 comprises an assemblability evaluation section 8 a and areverse-assemblability evaluation section 8 b. Such information as typeinformation on components as to whether to be a single product(single-unit component), a composite product (which is a componentaggregate formed of a plurality of components having previously beenassembled into one component and which is a component aggregate thatcannot be considered in terms of producibility etc. by evaluating itsassemblability and reverse assemblability), or a semifinished product(which is a component aggregate formed of a plurality of componentsbeing assembled and unitized, and which is a component aggregate thatcan be considered in terms of producibility etc. by evaluating itsassemblability and reverse assemblability), material information onthose components, information on the preparation of the base components,information on component suppliability, information on ease of componentholding (holdability), information on ease of assembling(assemblability), information on combinability (de-combinability),information on adjusting work, information on sharability, andinformation on component omittability is entered into the assemblabilityevaluation section 8 a. Based on these pieces of information, theevaluation of the assemblability is executed by the assemblabilityevaluation section 8 a. On the other hand, the type information oncomponents as to whether to be a single product, a composite product, ora semifinished product, the material information on those components,the information on ease of assembling (assemblability), the informationon combinability, the information on sharability, and the information oncomponent omittability is entered into the assemblability evaluationsection 8 a. Out of the information that has been entered into theassemblability evaluation section 8 a, such information as to thecomponent weight. information and the reusability information isadditionally entered from the assemblability evaluation section 8 a intothe reverse-assemblability evaluation section 8 b. Based on these piecesof information, the evaluation of the reverse assemblability is executedby the reverse-assemblability evaluation section 8 b.

Input of these pieces of information is done by input from theinformation within the storage unit 13 and by entering answerinformation with the input device 2 by an input operator such as anoperator in response to specifically-later-described questions.Evaluation results of the evaluation by thecomponent-evaluation-information computing section 8 are stored into thestorage unit 13 as shown in FIG. 14. The evaluation result informationstored in the storage unit 13 is displayed on a display unit as anexample of an output device 10 in the form of an analysis graph or anevaluation table or the like, and can be printed by a printing device asanother example of the output device 10, as required. Also, the assemblyflowchart prepared by the assembly-flow-chart preparing section 7 can bedisplayed on a display unit as an example of the output device 10, orprinted by a printing device as another example of the output device 10.Further, in the assembly-flow-chart preparing section 7, a reverse flowchart is prepared based on the prepared assembly flow chart and storedinto the storage unit 13, and further can be displayed on the displayunit or printed by the printing device like the assembly flow chart.

Referring to FIG. 14, the storage unit 13 is also capable of storingevaluation results etc. of commercial products that have been evaluatedbefore, and these evaluation results can be displayed on the displayunit or printed by the printing device together with the evaluationresult information of a most recently evaluated commercial product, asrequired. It is also possible that evaluation result information on acommercial product that has been previously evaluated is entered intothe component-evaluation-information computing section 8 and used forthe evaluation of the assemblability and the reverse assemblability, asrequired. In addition, since information as to the preparation ofassembly flow charts have also been stored in the storage unit 13, theinformation can be used for the output of the evaluation resultinformation.

As depicted in FIG. 14, when CAD information derived from the CAD system1 is entered into the computing unit 4, the information is entered intothe component-evaluation-information computing section 8 via theassembly-flow-chart preparing section 7. However, the present inventionnot being limited to this, necessary information out of the CADinformation from the CAD system 1 may be entered directly into thecomponent-evaluation-information computing section 8 without routing viathe assembly-flow-chart preparing section 7. It is also possible todirectly enter information on the commercial product 3, or CADinformation on the drawings, into the storage unit 13 without routingvia the component-evaluation-information computing section 8, and toenter the information on the commercial product 3, and the CAD system 1,from the storage unit 13 into the evaluation section 8. Also, asrequired, when changing scores, or the like, of answers to individualquestions is desired, score allocation within the assemblability andreverse-assemblability evaluation database 9, and the like, can bechanged via the input device 2, manually by an input operator, based onthe assembly information or information on the evaluation-targetcomponent 3.

Next, evaluation items for the assemblability and the reverseassemblability, questions at those evaluation items, selectional itemsof answers to the questions, and reverse-assemblability evaluation withrespect to the selectional-items are described in more detail withreference to FIGS. 16 to 20.

As major items of the evaluation items, for example, (10A) “material”,(10B) “preparation for base components”, (10C) “componentsuppliability”, (10D) “holdability”, (10E) “assemblability”, (10F)“combinability”, (10G) “necessity or non-necessity of adjustment”, (10H)“sharability”, (10I) “component omittability”, and (10J) “reusability”are adopted.

(10A) For the major item “material”, more detailed evaluation items forexample, “weight”, “component formation and material”, and“preprocessing” are adopted.

The question for the evaluation item “weight” is “weight?”, and thenumerical value input for this question is “80 g” as an example.

As the questions for the evaluation item “component formation andmaterial”, a first one is “How is the component made up?”, andselectional items for this question are “A: single product, B: composite(composite product), C: semifinished product”. Next, another question is“Which material is used?”, and selectional items for this question are“A: metal, B: resin, C: wood, D: others, E: harmful substance”. Althoughassembly scores for these selectional items are none, theirreverse-assemblability scores are 10, 5, 2, 1, and 0 for the items A, B,C, D, E, F and G, respectively, where in the case of a compositecomponent, the lowest score out of selected ones is adopted. Further,another question is “Is any combination type other than mechanical usedwithin the composite component?”, and selectional items for thisquestion are “A: no, B: yes”. Although assembly scores for theseselectional items are none, their reverse-assemblability scores are 5for A and 0 for B.

Next, the question for the evaluation item “preprocessing” is “Ispreprocessing necessary?”, and selectional items for this question are“A: yes, B: no”. Although assembly scores for these selectional itemsare none, reverse-assemblability scores are 0 for A and 5 for B.

(10B) For the major item “preparation for base components”, moredetailed evaluation items “material”, “posture change of basecomponents”, and “base component side jigs” are provided as an example.

The question for the evaluation item “material” is “Component is of thesame material?”. This is automatically decided based on materialinformation that has previously been entered. Although assembly scoresfor these selectional items are none, these pieces of information. areused for the decision as to the necessity or non-necessity ofdisassembly with respect to the reverse assemblability evaluation.

The question for the evaluation item “posture change of base components”is “Is posture change of base components necessary?”. Selectional itemsfor this question are “A: unnecessary, B: necessary”. Assembly scoresfor these selectional items are 3 for A and 0 for B. Reverseassemblability scores and evaluation are none.

The question for the evaluation item “base component side jigs” is “Isany jig for assembling component necessary?”, and selectional items forthis question are “A: unnecessary, B: necessary”. Assembly scores forthese selectional items are 5 for A and 0 for B. Reverse assemblabilityscores and evaluation are none.

(10C) For the major item “component suppliability”, more detailedevaluation items for example, “posture change of assembly component”,“fragility and vulnerability”, “indefinite shape”, “outlinecharacteristics”, and “overlap, fit-in, entanglement, affixation” areadopted.

The question for the evaluation item “posture change of assemblycomponent” is “Is any posture change of component necessary?”, andselectional items for this question are “A: unnecessary, B: necessary”.Assembly scores for these selectional items are 5 for A and 0 for B.Reverse assemblability scores and evaluation are none.

The question for the evaluation item “fragility and vulnerability” is“Is the component subject to damage?”, and selectional items for thisquestion are “A: no, B: yes”. Assembly scores for these selectionalitems are 5 for A and 0 for B. Reverse assemblability scores andevaluation are none.

The question for the evaluation item “indefinite shape” is “Is thecomponent shape definite?”, and selectional items for this question are“A: definite, B: indefinite”. The term “indefinite shape” herein refersto such a shape as cords and long springs. Assembly scores for theseselectional items are 5 for A and 0 for B. Reverse assemblability scoresand evaluation are none.

The question for the evaluation item “outline characteristics” is “Isthe component easy to align?”, and selectional items for this questionare “A: easy, B: not easy”. Assembly scores for these selectional itemsare 5 for A and 0 for B. Reverse assemblability scores and evaluationare none.

The question for the evaluation item “overlap, fit-in, entanglement,affixation” is “Is there any overlap, fit-in, entanglement, oraffixation?”, and selectional items for this question are “A: no, B:yes”. Assembly scores for these selectional items are 5 for A and 0 forB. Reverse assemblability scores and evaluation are none.

(10D) For the major item “holdability”, more detailed evaluation items,for example, two kinds of “chucking ability”are adopted.

The question for the evaluation item “chucking ability (1)” is “Whatchuck is used?”, and selectional items for this question are “A: generalchuck, B: special chuck, C: cannot be chucked”. Assembly scores forthese selectional items are 3, 2, and 0 for A, B, and C, respectively.Reverse assemblability scores and evaluation are none.

The question for the evaluation item “chucking ability (2)” is “Is therespace to accommodate a chuck?”, and selectional items for this questionare “A: yes, B: no”. Assembly scores for these selectional items are 5for A and 0 for B. Reverse assemblability scores and evaluation arenone.

(10E) For the major item “assemblability”, more detailed evaluationitems, for example, “positionability”, “direction and operation”, and“stability” are adopted.

The comment for the evaluation item “positionability” is “as topositioning”, and selectional items for this comment are “A: alignable,B: less alignable, C: not alignable”. Assembly scores for theseselectional items are 5, 3, and 0 for A, B, and C, respectively. Reverseassemblability scores and evaluation are none.

The comment for the evaluation item “direction and operation” is “as todirection and operation”, and selectional items for this comment are “A:simply (assemblable) from upward, B: simply (assemblable) from otherthan upward”, C: complex in both direction and operation”. Assemblyscores for these selectional items are 10, 5, and 0 for A, B, and C,respectively, while reverse assemblability scores are 10, 5, and 0 forA, B, and C, respectively.

The question for the evaluation item “stability” is “Is there stabilityof assembly component?”, and selectional items for this question are “A:yes, B: no”. Assembly scores for these: selectional items are 5 for Aand 0 for B. Reverse assemblability scores and evaluation are none.

(10F) For the major item “combinability”, more detailed evaluationitems, for example, “case of screwing” and “case of other than screwing”are adopted.

A question for the evaluation item “case of screwing” is “Is pre- andpost-processing work necessary?”, and selectional items for thisquestion are “A: unnecessary, B: necessary”. Assembly scores andreverse-assemblability scores and evaluation for these selectional itemsare none. Another question for the evaluation item is “Does thecomponent have sharability of screws?”, and selectional items for thisquestion are “A: yes, B: no”. Assembly scores and reverse assemblabilityscores and evaluation for these selectional items are none. A commentfor the evaluation item is “as to direction and method”, and selectionalitems for this comment are “A: combining with one screw from upward, B:combining with a few screws from upward, C: screwing from other thanupward”. Assembly scores for these selectional items are 10, 5, and-0for A, B, and C, respectively. In addition, this information will beused for the decision of necessity or non-necessity of disassembly inthe evaluation of the reverse assemblability.

A question for the evaluation item “case of other than screwing” is “Isthere preparation and processing work?”, and selectional items for thisquestion are “A: no, B: yes”. Assembly scores and reverse-assemblabilityscores and evaluation for these selectional items are none. A commentfor the evaluation item is “as to combination type”, and selectionalitems for this comment are “A: fit-in, B: press-fitting or caulking, C:mechanical component, D: spot welding, E: soldering, F: indefinitetightening, G: difficult-to-automatize (tightening method)”. Assemblyscores for these selectional items are 20, 15, 10, 8, 5, 2, and 0 for A,B, C, D, E, F, and G, respectively, while reverse assemblability scoresand evaluation for these selectional items are 20, 20, 20, 10, 5, 10,and 0 for A, B, C, D, E, F, and G, respectively, and these pieces ofinformation will be used for the decision of necessity or non-necessityof disassembly. Further, another question for the evaluation item is“How many directions and types of combination are involved?”, andselectional items for this question are to be selected from among“upward, downward, forward, backward, leftward, rightward” with respectto items selected from among the selectional items A to G for thequestion “as to combination type”. Although assembly scores are none,reverse-assemblability scores are given by using the scores for “as tocombination type”, as they are, in response to directions selected fromamong “upward, downward, forward, backward, leftward, rightward” or byadjusting the scores through appropriate diversion or other operation.

(10G) For the major item “necessity or non-necessity of adjustment”, amore detailed evaluation item, for example, “necessity or non-necessityof adjustment” is adopted. The question for the evaluation item is “Isadjustment work necessary?”, and selectional items for this question are“A: unnecessary, B: necessary”. Assembly scores andreverse-assemblability scores and evaluation for these selectional itemsare none.

(10H) For the major item “sharability”, a more detailed evaluation item,for example, “sharability” is adopted. The question for the evaluationitem is “Is there sharability?”, and selectional items for this questionare “A: yes, B: no”. Assembly scores for these selectional items are 5for A and 0 for B. Reverse assemblability scores and evaluation forthese selectional items are none.

(10I) For the major item “component omission”, a more detailedevaluation item, for example, “necessity or non-necessity of component”is adopted. The question for the evaluation item is “Is the componentnecessary?”, and selectional items for this question are “Can thecomponent be integrated into one unit? (YES/NO)”. Assembly scores forthese selectional items are none. In the reverse-assemblability scoreand evaluation, 20 points are given when the component can be integratedinto one unit.

(10J) For the major item “reusability”, a more detailed evaluation item,for example, “theoretical reusability” is adopted. The question for theevaluation item is “possibility of reuse?”, and selectional items forthis question are “{circle around (1)}: Wear (YES/NO), {circle around(2)}: deterioration (YES/NO), {circle around (3)}: flaw (YES/NO)?”.Assembly scores for these selectional items are none. In thereverse-assemblability score and evaluation, if all of the items {circlearound (1)}, {circle around (2)}, and {circle around (3)}are answeredNO, then it is decided that there is a possibility of reuse.

In the above-described explicit example, the major items “preparationfor base components”, “component suppliability”, “holdability”, and“necessity or non-necessity of adjustment” are information that is usedfor only the evaluation of the assemblability, while “material” and“reusability” are information that is used for only thereverse-assemblability. The major items “assemblability”,“combinability”, and “component omittability” are information that isused for both the evaluation of the assemblability and the evaluation ofthe reverse assemblability. That is, information as to “assemblability”,“combinability”, and “component omittability” is used for both theevaluation of the assemblability and the evaluation of the reverseassemblability.

In addition, the above assembly scores and reverse-assemblability scoresare given as an example, where it is arranged in the answers to the samequestion that a preferable answer results in a higher score than answersthat are not preferable. However, without being limited to the abovescore allocation, the present invention allows arbitrary setting, asrequired, by taking into consideration the way of displaying evaluationresults etc. of the assemblability evaluation and thereverse-assemblability evaluation (for example, such a score allocationthat a component superior in all the items results in a full score of100 points).

For instance, as a modification of the above example, another evaluationmethod for the “combinability” is explained in FIG. 22. In the“combinability” according to this modification, the following evaluationitems are adopted: {circle around (1)} disassembly targetcomponents/weight of unit?, {circle around (2)} easy-to-undo tighteningmethod? (input unnecessary . . . e.g. , information that has been usedfor the assemblability evaluation is automatically entered by theassemblability evaluation section 8 a) (tightening by screws/tighteningother than screws, type of untightening jigs . . . bare hand/generaljigs (screwdriver etc. )/jigs and equipment), {circle around (3)} (apreprocessing for untightening necessary? (for untightening, is suchpreprocessing as dewatering, degassing and derusting necessary?),{circle around (4)} tightening direction? (degree of concentration ofuntightening direction . . . the first untightening direction isregarded as top face (A) or front face (B)), {circle around (5)}removing operation simple? (input unnecessary . . . e.g., informationthat has been used for the assemblability evaluation is automaticallyentered by the assemblability evaluation section 8 a) (according to theitems for the assemblability evaluation (where one-operation removalfrom the top or front face is good). Then, as the evaluation scoreallocation, untightening score is classified into “screws” and “otherthan screws”, and further questions for these items are “number anddirection of untightening places”, “direction score”, “necessary tools”,and “removal operation”. In the case where the “necessary tools” are anyof bare hand, screwdriver, nipper, pliers, and the like, if the “removaloperation” is one operation, then the score allocation for the “removaloperation” is 20 points, where the “untightening score” is also 20points for both “screws” and “other than screws”. In the case where the“necessary tools” are any of power tool, soldering iron, hammer, chisel,and the like, if the “removal operation” is a double-operation, then thescore for “removal operation” is 10 points, where the “untighteningscore” is 15 points for “screws” and 10 points for “other than screws”.In the case where the “necessary tools” are other jigs, specialequipment or the like, if the “removal operation” is a complexoperation, then the score for “removal operation” is 0 points, where the“untightening score” is 10 points for “screws” and 0 points for “otherthan screws”. With respect to the “number and direction of untighteningplaces”, information as to the direction of upward, forward, leftward,rightward, backward, and downward as well as the number of untighteningplaces is entered, and used for the component evaluation and generalevaluation. Also, the “direction score” is 10 points for less than 4directions and 0 points for not less than 4 directions.

Further, more specifically, evaluation input sheets of an assemblabilityand reverse-assemblability (forward/reverse assemblability) evaluationsheet (component evaluation table) with respect to an example in whichthe assemblability and reverse-assemblability evaluation is performed onthe assumption of a washing machine as the product are shown in FIGS. 23to 27. Reverse-assemblability evaluation sheets of the assemblabilityand reverse-assemblability (forward/reverse assemblability) evaluationsheet (component evaluation table) are shown in FIGS. 28 to 31.

In this example, with respect to the “disassemblability”, a componentthat does not need to be disassembled is assigned a full score, and twocomponents assembled together, if made of the same material, are treatedas unnecessary to disassemble also in this case. Also, in a decision ofmaterial, iron, aluminum, and the like, because being easy to reuse bythe present state of the art, are scored high as compared with resins.This score allocation may appropriately be so set that the score becomeshigher as resin gets easier to recycle. According to this evaluationsheet, by the score graph, determination of the number of componentshaving low scores at the assemblability and the reverse assemblability(e.g., components that cause the general evaluation to be lowered) aswell as identification of those components can be easily achieved, andproposed as an improvement proposal. This may be implemented byoperator's visual observation, or may be outputted by automaticallydetecting the names and numbers of components that do not satisfydecision criteria after previously setting the decision criteria.

Next, an example of the assembly flow chart to be prepared prior to theevaluation of the assemblability and the reverse assemblability isdescribed below. As described above, after this assembly flow chart isprepared, assemblability evaluation is performed based on the assemblyflow, and then reverse-assemblability evaluation is performed and areverse-assembly flow is prepared, thus assembly flow chart being ofimportance.

When an assembly flow chart is prepared, first, a finished product isdisassembled into semifinished products and components. For thisdisassembly, information may be taken out within the CAD system 1 on theassumption that the finished product is actually disassembled and thenentered into the assembly-flow-chart preparing section 7, or results ofactual disassembly may be entered from the CAD system 1 into theassembly-flow-chart preparing section 7. It is noted here that the term,component, refers to one aggregate that does not need to be disassembledin the department or company that performs the evaluation of theassemblability, and the like, and refers to a single-unit product (onecomponent) or composite product as mentioned before. Also, the term,semifinished product, refers to a set of single-unit products orcomposite products composed of components that can be disassembled inthe department or company that performs the evaluation of theassemblability and the like. Then, first as shown in FIG. 43, a jig 300to be first assembled and a product “A” 301 as a finished productexample are displayed or entered and then a straight line 302 is drawnfrom the jig 300 to be first assembled toward the finished product 301.Names of components that are aggregates that do not need to bedisassembled in the department or company that performs the evaluationof the assemblability, and the like, are described, for example, on theleft side of the straight line 302, while semifinished products that canbe disassembled in the department or company that performs theevaluation of the assemblability, and the like (i.e. , that foundimprovable in design or other process as a result of the evaluation ofthe assemblability and the like), are described on the right side of thestraight line 302, opposite to the left side. Each of the semifinishedproducts, for clear expression of being disassemblable, is surroundedby, for example, a rectangular frame. In FIG. 43, an agitation unit(agitation U) 303, a drum unit (drum U) 304, a drum cover unit (drumcover U) 305, a drum assembly (drum As) 312 are semifinished products.From the individual semifinished products, lateral lines 306, 307, and308 are drawn rightward to appropriate lengths, upwardly bent straightlines 306 a, 307 a, and 308 a are drawn, further components orsemifinished products that constitute the individual semifinishedproducts are disassembled on the left side of the straight lines 306 a,307 a, and 308 a, and the names of components or semifinished productsare described so that jigs 309, 310, and 311 are located at theuppermost ends of the lines. On the right side of the straight lines 306a, 307 a, and 308 a, which is the opposite side to the left side wherethe names of the components or semifinished products are described, isdescribed the assembly way for assembling the component or semifinishedproduct.

The example of the assembly flow chart of FIG. 43 is described in moredetail.

With the jig 300 for the product “A” regarded as a base component, aframe (component number 100) is placed on this jig 300. Then, with theframe (component number 100) regarded as a base component, an agitationunit 303 (component number 110) is assembled by screwing to this frame(component number 100). Then, with the agitation unit 303 regarded as abase component, a sensor (component number 101) is assembled to thisagitation unit 303 by bending work. Then, with the agitation unit 303regard as a base component, a sensor cover (component number 102) isassembled to this agitation unit 303 by double-sided tape. Then, withthe frame (component number 100) regarded as a base component, a stay(component number 103) is assembled to this frame (component number 100)by screwing. Then, with the stay (component number 103) regarded as abase component, a blade (component number 104) is assembled to this stay(component number 103) by seal affixation.

Next, with the frame (component number 100) regard as a base component,a drum unit 304 (component number 120) is assembled to this frame(component number 100) by rivets. After that, with the frame (componentnumber 100) regarded as a base component, a drum cover unit 305(component number 130) is assembled to this frame (component number 100)by caulking. After that, with the frame (component number 100) regardedas a base component, a frame cover (component number 106) is assembledto this frame (component number 100) by twisting. Then, with the framecover (component number 106) regarded as a base component, a groundterminal (component number 107) is assembled to this frame cover(component number 106) by screwing. Then, with the agitation unit 303(component number 110) regarded as a base component, a power cord(component number 108) is assembled to this agitation unit (componentnumber 110) by screwing. Then, with the frame (component number 100)regarded as a base component, a nameplate (component number 109) isassembled to this frame (component number 100) by seal affixation, thusthe component “A” 301 being completed.

In this connection, the agitation unit 303 (component number 110) isassembled in advance in the following manner. That is, with the jig 309for the agitation unit regarded as a base component, a bearing A(component number 111) is placed on this jig 309. Then, a bearing B(component number 112) is assembled to the bearing A (component number111) by press fitting. Then, with the bearing B (component number 112)regarded as a base component, a blade shaft (component number 113) isassembled to this bearing B (component number 112) by other work. Then,with the blade shaft (component number 113) regarded as a basecomponent, a blade (component number 114) is assembled to this bladeshaft (component number 113) by a snap ring, thus the agitation unit 303(component number 110) being completed.

Also, the drum unit 304 (component number 120) is assembled in thefollowing manner. That is, with the jig 310 for the drum unit regardedas a base component, a drum flange (component number 121) is placed onthis jig 310. Then, with the drum flange (component number 121) regardedas a base component, the drum assembly 312 (component number 125) whichis a semifinished product is assembled to this drum flange (componentnumber 121) by press fitting. Then, with the drum flange (componentnumber 121) regarded as a base component, a drum cap (component number122) is assembled to this drum flange (component number 121) byscrewing, thus the drum unit 304 being completed.

Also, as to the drum assembly 312, with a jig 313 for the drum assemblyregarded as a base component, a drum shaft (component number 126) and adrum cylinder (component number 127) are assembled together bycaulking-with the use of this jig 313, thus the drum assembly 312 beingcompleted.

Also, the drum cover unit 305 is assembled in the following manner. Thatis, with a jig 311 for the drum cover unit regarded as a base component,a frame cover (component number 131) is placed on this jig 311. Then,with the frame cover (component number 131) regarded as a basecomponent, a film (component number 132) is assembled to this framecover (component number 131) by seal affixation. Then, with the framecover (component number 131) regarded as a base component, a sheet(component number 133) is assembled to this frame cover (componentnumber 131) by double-sided tape, thus the drum cover unit 305 beingcompleted.

As shown above, changing the base component for each assemble work canalso be displayed in the assembly flow chart. Also, information as tothe material type of each component can also be included in the assemblyflow chart by distinguishing individual components according to theirmaterials by means of color-coding or hatching, or by means of varioustypes of lines such as dotted line or one-dot chain line. Further, whenthe number of individual components is one, the number can also bedisplayed as (1).

Based on the above assembly flow chart, the procedure for preparing areverse-assembly flow chart is described with reference to FIG. 44.

With respect to the product “A” 301, first, a nameplate (componentnumber 109) that has been seal-affixed is removed from the frame(component number 100) serving as a base component. Then, the power cord(component number 108) is removed from the agitation unit (componentnumber 110) serving as a base component by loosening the screws. Then,the ground terminal (component number 107) is removed from the framecover (component number 106) serving as a base component by looseningthe screws. Then, the frame cover (component number 106) is removed fromthe frame (component number 100) serving as a base component byreleasing the caulking of the drum cover unit 305 (component number130).

Then, the drum unit 304 (component number 120) is removed from the frame(component number 100) serving as a base component by removing therivets. Then, the blade (component number 104) that has beenseal-affixed is removed from the stay (component number 103) serving asa base component. Then, the stay (component number 103) is removed fromthe frame (component number 100) serving as a base component byloosening the screws. Then, the sensor cover (component number 102)affixed by double-sided tape is removed from the agitation unit 303(component number 110) serving as a base component. Then, the sensor(component number 101) is removed from the agitation unit 303-serving asa base component by bending work. Then, the agitation unit 303 isremoved from the frame (component number 100) serving as a basecomponent by loosening the screws of the agitation unit 303, thus theframe (component number 100) being left.

In the above description, as to the removed drum cover unit 305, thesheet (component number 133) that has been affixed by double-sided tapeis first removed, the film (component number 132) that has beenseal-affixed is removed, and the frame cover (component number 131) isremoved, thus the drum cover unit 305 being completely disassembled.

Also, as to the removed drum unit 304, the drum cap (component number122) is first removed by loosening its screws, the drum assembly 312(component number 125) is removed by releasing its press fitting, andthe drum flange (component number 121) is removed, thus the drum unit304 being completely disassembled.

Also, as to the removed drum assembly 312, the drum cylinder (componentnumber 127) is removed by releasing its caulking, and the drum shaft(component number 126) is removed, thus the drum assembly 312 beingcompletely disassembled.

Also, as to the removed agitation unit 303, the blade (component number114) is removed by removing its snap ring, the blade shaft (componentnumber 113) is removed by other work, the bearing B (component number112) is removed by releasing its press fitting, and the bearing A(component number 111) is removed by releasing its press fitting, thusthe agitation unit 303 being completely disassembled.

In addition, information as to the material type of each component canalso be included in the reverse-assembly flow chart, like the assemblyflow chart, by distinguishing individual components according to theirmaterials by means of color-coding or hatching, or by means of vanoustypes of lines such as dotted line or one-dot chain line. Further, whenthe number of individual components is one, the number can also bedisplayed as (1).

As a result of drawing the assembly flow chart as shown above, thefollowing advantages are produced: (1) The assembly sequence can beclarified, that is, the assembly sequence can be known by even personsother than the input operator or known on even later days; (2) Combiningmeans for assembling the components can be clarified; (3) Semifinishedproducts and components can be distinguished from each other; (4)Hierarchies and parent-child relations of semifinished products can beclarified; (5) States of base components, e. g. , whether to beinverted. or rotated, can be clarified; and (6) Evaluation omissions ofcomponents and semifinished products (units) in the evaluation processcan be eliminated.

Like this, by preparing the assembly flow chart, such information ascomponent name, component number, base component name, base componentnumber, posture change of base components, and number of components issent from the CAD system 1 to the assembly-flow-chart preparing section7 and further to the component-evaluation-information computing section8. Accordingly, in the assembly-flow-chart preparing section 7 and thecomponent-evaluation-information computing section 8, the foregoingitems do not need to be reentered.

Further, the length of the assembly process can be known by the flowlength of the assembly flow chart. Also, the level of how manysemifinished products are involved makes known the risk that stock inproduction may increase. Further, the depth of the hierarchy makes knownthe length of the production lead time. Also, the size of the area ofthe entire assembly flow chart makes known the complexity of design.

On the other hand, the following can be known from the reverse-assembly(disassembly) flow chart.

That is, the position on design of components including environmentallyloading substances, the route of the disassembly until theenvironmentally loading substances are taken out, man-hours of thedisassembly until the environmentally loading substances are taken out,the position on design of components containing valuables, the route ofthe disassembly until the valuables are taken out, man-hours of thedisassembly until the valuables are taken out, the position on design ofrecyclables, the route of the disassembly until the recyclables aretaken out, man-hours of the disassembly until the recyclables are takenout, how the scope of non-necessity of disassembly(unnecessary-to-disassemble components) ranges, and materialdistribution of components (the degree of collection of similar kinds ofmaterials) can be known.

For example, although not shown specifically, in the case of a componentthat is made up by assembling a cover or other component by screwing toa component having a brass nut insert-molded in a base component ofsynthetic resin, if the inserted nut is eliminated while the basecomponent is made of iron with screws formed therein, then a reductionin the number of components can be implemented so that the recyclabilitycan be enhanced.

Also, as to the manner for decommissioning environmentally loadingchemical substances, in the case of a semifinished product in which onlythe sensor cover is made of an environmentally loading chemicalsubstance that causes toxic gas to be produced in incineration, such asvinyl chloride, while the other components are not environmentallyloading chemical substances, this information is displayed in the flowchart by a display unit as an example of the output device 10.Accordingly, for decommissioning of the environmentally loading chemicalsubstance, improvement points can be clearly understood, such as makingthe sensor cover easier to disassemble from the semifinished product byassembling only the sensor cover independently of the semifinishedproduct, or modifying the design so that the material of the sensorcover is changed to another that is not an environmentally loadingchemical substance. Further, in the reverse assemblability evaluationprocess, whereas part of the environmentally loading chemical substanceand part in which materials that are not environmentally loadingchemical substances have been assembled together need to be disassembledfrom each other, the part in which materials that are notenvironmentally loading chemical substances have been assembled togetherdoes not need to be disassembled, showing that the man-hours of thedisassembly is reduced.

Also, in the flow chart, when it has been found that five componentsmade of respectively different materials are provided, where the numberof kinds of materials is five, changing the number of materials from 5to 3 kinds produces a part in which components of the same material areassembled together. In such a case, because this part does do not needto be disassembled, man-hours of the disassembly can be reduced. It canalso be understood that changing the material, while viewing the flowchart, so that a easy-to-recycle metal part or thermoplastic resinsother than hard-to-recycle synthetic resins are increased, facilitatesreuse of the materials and enhances their recyclability.

Functions and effects by the assemblability and reverse-assemblabilityevaluating method and apparatus according to this embodiment aredescribed below.

By the assemblability and reverse-assemblability evaluating method andapparatus of this embodiment, since evaluation items are selected basedon the work of actual assembly process, the operator (e. g. , designer)enters information on evaluation items directly to the evaluationapparatus based on actual assembly work. On the other hand, it can beseen that, assuming that the reverse-assembly process such asdisassembly for which the reverse assemblability such as reusability isevaluated is a reverse flow to the above assembly process, the reverseassemblability is automatically evaluated while information for theevaluation of the reverse assemblability, which is unknown from theassemblability, can be entered. As a result, the operator is able toenter information with a better understanding of the reverse-assemblywork such as assembly and disassembly, which helps the operator todefinitively determine improvement proposals for both the assemblabilityand the reverse assemblability.

Also, as evaluation-target products, the evaluation unit may be set as aunit product (semifinished product), a composite product made up of aplurality of components, and one component, without limiting to afinished product, in which case an operator, such as a designer orproduction line worker, is able to evaluate the assemblability and thereverse assemblability in such a unit that is made closest to the formin which finished products, semifinished products, and components arerecognized. Also, for comparisons between the operator's company's newproducts. and conventional products as well as comparisons withcompetitive company's products, the! assemblability and the reverseassemblability can be evaluated relatively in such levels as productlevel, semifinished product level, and component level.

Also, in conventional evaluation of assemblability, there are many caseswhere only design information such as “positional relation ofcomponents” and “tightening means” are taken as evaluation items.However, in such cases, although entry is simple (or can beautomatically achieved by direct coupling with a CAD (Computer AidedDesign) system), there is a gap from the assemblability in actualassembly work, causing a problem that the evaluation accuracy issacrificed. In contrast to this, in the method and apparatus of thisembodiment, evaluation items representing actual assembly work such as“posture change” and “holdability” make it possible to enter informationon assemblability, and the like, so that the operator is helped to makeentry and that the assemblability and the reverse assemblability can beevaluated with higher accuracy.

Further, the operator enters information into the evaluation apparatusin response to the questions as to the evaluation items on theassemblability, or on the assemblability and the reverse assemblability,thus making it possible to output forward and reverse assemblabilityevaluation scores as to the assemblability and the reverseassemblability, a necessary-to-be-improved component list, a reusablecomponent list, an unnecessary-to-disassemble component list, assemblyman-hours, disassembly man-hours, and the like, as evaluation results ofthe assemblability and the reverse assemblability, so that theassemblability and the reverse assemblability can be evaluatedsimultaneously. That is, according to this embodiment, if theassemblability and reverse assemblability evaluation is performed, forexample, at a design stage, then assemblability, such as producibility,as well as reverse assemblability, such as recyclability, can beevaluated simultaneously in a short time, which can lead to a designimprovement. Also, since the evaluation of the reverse assemblability isperformed principally based on information acquired on evaluation itemsrelated to the assemblability, the operator is able to accuratelyevaluate not only the assemblability but also the reverse assemblabilityeven if he is not so conscious of the reverse assemblability.

Also, as shown in FIG. 4, for the evaluation method and apparatusaccording to this embodiment, the evaluation items for theassemblability are base components as a basis of the product,suppliability of components of the product, assemble works of theproduct, tightening types/places, sharability of components, and thelike. Outputs as a result of the evaluation on these evaluation itemsare an assembly flow chart, features of product structure, anassemblability evaluation graph (in this graph, hard-to-assemblecomponents can be extracted), extraction of omittable components,assembly man-hours, and the like. As a result of this, by evaluating theproduct as to whether it will be easy to produce, an evaluation as afinished product, i.e. as a commercial product, can be achieved.

On the other hand, the evaluation items for the reverse assemblabilityare material/weight of disassembly components, disassembly works of theproduct, untightening types/places, degrees of influence on globalenvironment, harmful substances contained in the product, and the likein the disassembly process. Outputs as a result of the evaluation onthese evaluation items are a reverse-assembly flow chart, areverse-assemblability evaluation graph, extraction ofunnecessary-to-disassemble/reuse components, use amount of individualmaterials, reverse-assembly man-hours, rates of recyclability, and thelike. As a result of this, by evaluating the product as to whether itwill be environment-friendly, an evaluation as a finished product, i.e.as a commercial product, can be achieved.

Also, conventionally, when the evaluation of the assemblability and theevaluation of the reusability are executed independently of each other,it would be difficult to simultaneously accomplish an improvement in theevaluation of the assemblability and an improvement in the evaluation ofthe reusability. In contrast to this, in this embodiment, since theevaluation of the assemblability and the evaluation of the reverseassemblability are simultaneously executed, it can be easily predictedthat if components or units or the like that are worse in the evaluationof the assemblability and the reverse assemblability are improved interms of low scored items, then the evaluation of both theassemblability and the reverse assemblability can be enhanced, so thatimprovement in both the assemblability and the reverse assemblabilitycan be accomplished easily and securely.

In addition, the present invention is not limited to the aboveembodiment and may be embodied in other various ways.

For instance, as evaluation items for entry by the operator, evaluationitems for the assemblability may be set without providing evaluationitems that are used for only the reverse assemblability, and informationacquired from the evaluation items may be selected, as appropriate, andused for the evaluation of the reverse assemblability. In this casealso, information on evaluation items that are used only for theevaluation of the reverse assemblability may be acquired from a CADsystem or a database having stored information on the reverseassemblability.

Although the present invention has been fully described in connectionwith the preferred embodiments thereof with reference to theaccompanying drawings, it is to be noted that various changes andmodifications are apparent to those skilled in the art. Such changes andmodifications are to be understood as included within the scope of thepresent invention as defined by the appended claims unless they departtherefrom.

What is claimed is:
 1. A method of evaluating the assemblability andreverse-assemblability of a product comprising at least one of a singlecomponent, a composite component comprising a plurality of singlecomponents combined together, a semifinished product comprising aplurality of single components assembled together or a finished product,said method comprising: providing assemblability evaluation informationitems corresponding to assemblability of the product; and simultaneouslyperforming an assemblability evaluation of the product based on theprovided assemblability evaluation information items, and areverse-assemblability evaluation of the product based on a number ofthe assemblability evaluation information items.
 2. The method accordingto claim 1, further comprising: providing reverse-assemblabilityevaluation information items corresponding to reverse-assemblability ofthe product, wherein said performing the reverse-assemblabilityevaluation of the product comprises performing thereverse-assemblability evaluation of the product based on thereverse-assemblability evaluation information items and the number ofthe assemblability evaluation information items.
 3. The method accordingto claim 1, wherein said performing an assemblability evaluation of theproduct comprises evaluating ease of production of the product orevaluating ease of assembly of the product, wherein said performing areverse-assemblability evaluation of the product comprises evaluatingease of disassembly of the product, evaluating ease of classification ofthe product, evaluating ease of reuse of the product and evaluatingsafety of the product.
 4. The method according to claim 1, wherein theassemblability evaluation information items comprise selectionalinformation items comprising at least one of a plurality of answeritems, numerical information items comprising numerical values and YESor NO information items, and wherein said simultaneously performing theassemblability evaluation of the product and the reverse-assemblabilityevaluation of the product comprises providing evaluation scores for theassemblability evaluation information items.
 5. The method according toclaim 1, wherein the assemblability evaluation information itemscomprise at least one evaluation information item corresponding toevaluation of preparation for a base component of the product, at leastone evaluation information item corresponding to evaluation ofsuppliability of the base component of the product, at least oneevaluation information item corresponding to evaluation of holdabilityof the base component of the product, at least one evaluationinformation item corresponding to evaluation of assemblability of thebase component of the product, at least one evaluation information itemcorresponding to evaluation of combinability of the base component ofthe product, at least one evaluation information item corresponding toevaluation of necessity or non-necessity of adjustment of the basecomponent of the product, at least one evaluation information itemcorresponding to evaluation of component sharability of the basecomponent of the product and at least one evaluation information itemcorresponding to evaluation of component omittability of the product. 6.The method according to claim 5, wherein the at least one evaluationinformation item corresponding to evaluation of preparation for the basecomponent of the product comprises an evaluation information itemcorresponding to evaluation of posture change of the base component andan evaluation information item corresponding to evaluation of necessityor non-necessity of a jig for the base component, wherein the at leastone evaluation information item corresponding to evaluation ofsuppliability of the product comprises an evaluation information itemcorresponding to evaluation of posture change of the product, anevaluation information item corresponding to evaluation of vulnerabilityof the product, an evaluation information item corresponding toevaluation of indefinite shape of the product, an evaluation informationitem corresponding to evaluation of an outline feature of the productand an evaluation information item corresponding to evaluation ofentanglement of the product, wherein the at least one evaluationinformation item corresponding to evaluation of holdability comprises anevaluation information item corresponding to evaluation of whether achuck is necessary for holding the product and an evaluation informationitem corresponding to evaluation of an amount of chuck space needed forholding the product, wherein the at least one evaluation informationitem corresponding to evaluation of assemblability comprises anevaluation information item corresponding to evaluation ofpositionability of the product, an evaluation information itemcorresponding to evaluation of direction of assembly of the product andan evaluation information item corresponding to evaluation of stabilityof the product, wherein the at least one evaluation information itemcorresponding to evaluation of combinability comprises an evaluationinformation item corresponding to evaluation of a number of tighteningscrews in an assembly process of the product, at least one evaluationinformation item corresponding to evaluation of a direction oftightening of at least one screw in the assembly process of the product,at least one evaluation information item corresponding to evaluation ofat least one place of tightening other than a place of tightening of theat least one tightening screw in the assembly process, an evaluationinformation item corresponding to an evaluation of a number oftightenings other than the tightening of the at least one tighteningscrew in the assembly process and at least one evaluation informationitem corresponding to evaluation of at least one direction of tighteningother than the tightening of the at least one tightening screw in theassembly process, wherein the at least one evaluation information itemcorresponding to evaluation of necessity or non-necessity of adjustmentcorresponds to evaluation of necessity or non-necessity of adjustmentsin the assembly process of the product, wherein the at least oneevaluation information item corresponding to evaluation of componentsharability comprises an evaluation information item corresponding toevaluation of how sharability of components of the product isaccomplished, and wherein the at least one evaluation information itemcorresponding to evaluation of component omittability corresponds toevaluation of possibility that a component of the product can beomitted.
 7. The method according to claim 5, further comprising settingan assembly total score for a component of the product that is possibleto be omitted from the product to 0 after said performing theassemblability evaluation of the product and after said performing thereverse-assemblability evaluation.
 8. The method according to claim 1,further comprising: providing reverse-assemblability evaluationinformation items corresponding to evaluation of reverse-assemblabilityof the product, wherein said providing assemblability evaluationinformation items comprises providing at least one evaluationinformation item corresponding to evaluation of disassemblability,wherein the reverse-assemblability evaluation information items compriseat least one evaluation information item corresponding to evaluation ofclassifiability of the product, at least one evaluation information itemcorresponding to evaluation of reusability of the product and anevaluation information item corresponding to evaluation of safety of theproduct, wherein said performing a reverse-assemblability evaluation ofthe product comprises performing a reverse-assemblability evaluation ofthe product based on the at least one evaluation information itemcorresponding to evaluation of disassemblability and thereverse-assemblability evaluation information items.
 9. The methodaccording to claim 8, wherein the at least one evaluation informationitem corresponding to evaluation of disassemblability comprises at leastone evaluation information item corresponding to evaluation ofde-combinability of the product, which comprises at least one evaluationinformation item corresponding to evaluation of at least one tighteningplace of the product, an evaluation information item corresponding toevaluation of pre-processing of the product, an evaluation informationitem corresponding to evaluation of post-processing of the product, anevaluation information item corresponding to evaluation of combinationtype of the product, an evaluation information item corresponding toevaluation of combination direction of the product, at least oneevaluation information item corresponding to evaluation of tighteningscrew sharability of the product and at least one evaluation informationitem corresponding to evaluation of tightening direction of tighteningscrews of the product, wherein the at least one evaluation informationitem corresponding to evaluation of classifiability of the productcomprises at least one evaluation information item corresponding toevaluation of component weight of the product, at least one evaluationinformation item corresponding to evaluation of number of the productand at least one evaluation information item corresponding to evaluationof material types of the product, wherein the at least one evaluationinformation item corresponding to an evaluation of component reusabilityof the product corresponds to an evaluation of possibility of reuse ofcomponents of the product, and wherein the evaluation information itemcorresponding to evaluation of safety of the product corresponds to anevaluation of whether any harmful substance is contained in the product.10. The method according to claim 11, further comprising: providingreverse-assemblability evaluation information items corresponding toreverse-assemblability of the product, wherein the assemblabilityevaluation information items comprise at least one evaluationinformation item corresponding to evaluation of preparation for a basecomponent of the product, at least one evaluation information itemcorresponding to evaluation of suppliability of the base component ofthe product, at least one evaluation information item corresponding toevaluation of holdability of the base component of the product, at leastone evaluation information item corresponding to evaluation ofassemblability of the base component of the product, at least oneevaluation information item corresponding to evaluation of combinabilityof the base component of the product, at least one evaluationinformation item corresponding to evaluation of necessity ornon-necessity of adjustment of the base component of the product, atleast one evaluation information item corresponding to evaluation ofcomponent sharability of the base component of the product and at leastone evaluation information item corresponding to evaluation of componentomittability of the product, wherein the at least one evaluationinformation item corresponding to evaluation of preparation for the basecomponent of the product comprises an evaluation information itemcorresponding to evaluation of posture change of the base component andan evaluation information item corresponding to evaluation of necessityor non-necessity of a jig for the base component, wherein the at leastone evaluation information item corresponding to evaluation ofsuppliability of the product comprises an evaluation information itemcorresponding to evaluation of posture change of the product, anevaluation information item corresponding to evaluation of vulnerabilityof the product, an evaluation information item corresponding toevaluation of indefinite shape of the product, an evaluation informationitem corresponding to evaluation of outline feature of the product andan evaluation information item corresponding to evaluation ofentanglement of the product, wherein the at least one evaluationinformation item corresponding to evaluation of holdability comprises anevaluation information item corresponding to evaluation of whether achuck is necessary for holding the product and an evaluation informationitem corresponding to evaluation of an amount chuck space for holdingthe product, wherein the at least one evaluation information itemcorresponding to evaluation of assemblability comprises an evaluationinformation item corresponding to evaluation of positionability of theproduct, an evaluation information item corresponding to evaluation ofdirection of assembly of the product and an evaluation information itemcorresponding to evaluation of stability of the product, wherein the atleast one evaluation information item corresponding to evaluation ofcombinability comprises an evaluation information item corresponding toevaluation of a number of tightening screws in an assembly process ofthe product, at least one evaluation information item corresponding toevaluation of a direction of tightening of at least one screw in theassembly process of the product, at least one evaluation informationitem corresponding to evaluation of at least one place of tighteningother than a place of tightening of the at least one tightening screw inthe assembly process, an evaluation information item corresponding to anevaluation of a number of tightenings other than the tightening of theat least one tightening screw in the assembly process and at least oneevaluation information item corresponding to evaluation of at least onedirection of tightening other than the tightening of the at least onetightening screw in the assembly process, wherein the at least oneevaluation information item corresponding to evaluation of necessity ornon-necessity of adjustment corresponds to evaluation of necessity ornon-necessity of adjustments in the assembly process of the product,wherein the at least one evaluation information item corresponding toevaluation of component sharability corresponds to evaluation of howsharability of components of the product is accomplished, wherein the atleast one evaluation information item corresponding to evaluation ofcomponent omittability corresponds to evaluation of possibility that acomponent of the product can be omitted, wherein the assemblabilityevaluation information items comprise at least one information itemcorresponding to evaluation of disassemblability, wherein thereverse-assemblability evaluation information items comprise at leastone information item corresponding to evaluation of classifiability ofthe product, at least one information item corresponding to evaluationof reusability of the product and an information item corresponding toevaluation of safety of the product, wherein the at least one evaluationinformation item corresponding to evaluation of disassemblabilitycomprises at least one evaluation information item corresponding toevaluation of de-combinability of the product, which comprises at leastone evaluation information item corresponding to evaluation of at leastone tightening place of the product, an evaluation information itemcorresponding to evaluation of pre-processing of the product, anevaluation information item corresponding to evaluation ofpost-processing of the product, an evaluation information itemcorresponding to evaluation of combination type of the product, anevaluation information item corresponding to evaluation of combinationdirection of the product, at least one evaluation information itemcorresponding to evaluation of tightening screw sharability of theproduct and at least one evaluation information item corresponding toevaluation of tightening direction of tightening screws of the product,wherein the at least one evaluation information item corresponding toevaluation of classifiability of the product comprises at least oneevaluation information item corresponding to evaluation of componentweight of the product, at least one evaluation information itemcorresponding to evaluation of number of the product and at least oneevaluation information item corresponding to evaluation of materialtypes of the product, wherein the at least one evaluation informationitem corresponding to an evaluation of component reusability of theproduct corresponds to an evaluation of possibility of reuse ofcomponents of the product, wherein the evaluation information itemcorresponding to evaluation of safety of the product corresponds to anevaluation of whether any harmful substance is contained in the product,wherein said performing assemblability evaluation and said performingreverse-assemblability evaluation are based on the at least oneevaluation information item corresponding to evaluation of combinabilityand said at least one evaluation information item corresponding toevaluation of component omittability, wherein the at least oneevaluation information item corresponding to evaluation ofde-combinability of the product and the at least one evaluationinformation item corresponding to evaluation of classifiability of theproduct comprise at least one evaluation information item correspondingto evaluation of component weight and at least one evaluationinformation item corresponding to evaluation of number of material typesof the product, and wherein the at least one evaluation information itemcorresponding to evaluation of classifiability of the product and theleast one evaluation information item corresponding to evaluation ofsafety of the product comprise an evaluation information itemcorresponding to evaluation of material type of the product.
 11. Themethod according to claim 1, further comprising: supplying results ofthe assemblability evaluation; and supplying results of thereverse-assemblability evaluation, wherein the results of theassemblability evaluation comprise at least one of a graph comprisinginformation corresponding to the assemblability evaluation, a table orgraph comprising information corresponding to structural characteristicsof the product, a table or graph comprising information corresponding toextraction of omittable components and a table or graph comprisinginformation corresponding to assembly man-hours, and wherein the resultsof the reverse-assemblability evaluation comprise at least one of a flowchart comprising information corresponding to the reverse-assembly ofthe product, a graph comprising information corresponding toreverse-assemblability evaluation of the product, a table or graphcomprising information corresponding to extraction ofunnecessary-to-disassemble/reuse components of the product, a table orgraph comprising information corresponding to reverse-assembly man-hoursof the product, a table or graph comprising information corresponding touse amount of each material of the product and a table or graphcomprising information corresponding to rate of recyclability of theproduct.
 12. An apparatus for evaluating the assemblability andreverse-assemblability of a product comprising at least one of a singlecomponent, a composite product comprising a plurality: of componentsthat are combined together, a semifinished product comprising aplurality of components that are assembled together, or a finishedproduct, said apparatus operable to receive CAD informationcorresponding to the product from a CAD system, said apparatuscomprising: a computing unit operable to receive assembly informationcorresponding to the product, and other information corresponding tocomponent name, assembly sequence and quantity, said computing unitcomprising an assembly-flow-chart preparing section and an evaluationdatabase; and a storage unit; wherein said computing unit is operable toinstruct said storage unit to store the assembly information and otherinformation in said storage unit, wherein said computing unit isoperable to prepare an assembly flow chart in said assembly-flow-chartpreparing section based on the assembly information and the otherinformation stored in said storage unit and based on the CADinformation, wherein said computing unit is operable to store theassembly flow chart into the storage unit, wherein said computing unitis operable to extract from the storage unit, information correspondingto assembly components of the product, base components of the product,relations between assembly components of the product and base componentsof the product, and product component detail information on combinationtype, wherein said computing unit is operable to perform, based on theextracted information, an assemblability and reverse-assemblabilityevaluation by using computational equations, evaluation criteria,evaluation scores, man-hours and particular-component extraction logics,necessary for the assemblability and reverse-assemblability evaluationof the product, which are stored in a database for the assemblabilityand reverse-assemblability evaluation.
 13. The apparatus according toclaim 12, wherein said computing unit further comprises an evaluationunit that comprises an assemblability evaluation section and areverse-assemblability evaluation section, wherein said assemblabilityevaluation section is operable to store information for use forevaluating assemblability of the product comprising type informationcorresponding to whether the product is a single product, a compositeproduct, or a semifinished product, material information correspondingto the material of the product, base component information correspondingto a base component of the product, suppliability informationcorresponding to suppliability of the product, holdability informationcorresponding to holdability of the product, assemblability informationcorresponding to assemblability of the product, combinabilityinformation corresponding to combinability of the product, adjustingwork information corresponding to adjusting work of the product,sharability information corresponding to sharability of the product andcomponent omittability information corresponding to componentomittability of the product, wherein said assemblability evaluationsection is operable to evaluate an assemblability of the product andgenerate an assemblability evaluation result, wherein saidassemblability evaluation section is operable to transfer the typeinformation, the material information, the assemblability information,the combinability information, the sharability information and thecomponent omittability information to said reverse-assemblabilityevaluation section, wherein said reverse-assemblability evaluationsection is operable to store information for use for evaluatingreverse-assemblability of the product comprising the type information,the material information, the assemblability information, thecombinability information, the sharability information, the componentomittability information, component weight information corresponding toa component weight of a component of the product and reusabilityinformation corresponding to reusability of the product, and whereinsaid reverse-assemblability evaluation section is operable to evaluate areverse-assemblability of the product and generate areverse-assemblability evaluation result.
 14. The apparatus according toclaim 13, wherein the component omittability information is capable ofbeing set to 0 at a time after said reverse-assemblability evaluationsection evaluates the reverse-assemblability of the product.
 15. Theapparatus according to claim 12, further comprising an output device,wherein said evaluation unit is operable to transmit the assemblabilityevaluation result and the reverse-assemblability evaluation result tosaid storage unit and to said output device, wherein said storage unitis operable to store the assemblability evaluation result and thereverse-assemblability evaluation result, wherein said output device isoperable to output the assemblability evaluation result as a graph ortable, and wherein said output device is operable to output thereverse-assemblability evaluation result as a graph or table.
 16. Theapparatus according to claim 12, wherein the assembly informationcomprises information corresponding to ease of production of the productor information corresponding to ease of assembly of the product, andwherein the reverse assemblability information comprises informationcorresponding to disassemblability of the product, informationcorresponding to classifiability of the product, informationcorresponding to reusability of the product and informationcorresponding to safety.
 17. The apparatus according to claim 12,further comprising an input device operable to input assemblabilityevaluation information items comprising selectional information itemscomprising at least one of a plurality of answer items, numericalinformation items comprising numerical values, and YES/NO informationitems, wherein said apparatus is operable to simultaneously evaluate theassemblability of the product and the reverse-assemblability of theproduct, and wherein said apparatus is operable to generate anassemblability score and a reverse-assemblability score based on theevaluation of the assemblability of the product and thereverse-assemblability of the product, respectively.
 18. The apparatusaccording to claim 12, wherein said apparatus is operable to storeevaluation information items comprising at least one evaluationinformation item corresponding to evaluation of preparation for a basecomponent of the product, at least one evaluation information itemcorresponding to evaluation of suppliability of the base component ofthe product, at least one evaluation information item corresponding toevaluation of holdability of the base component of the product, at leastone evaluation information item corresponding to evaluation ofassemblability of the base component of the product, at least oneevaluation information item corresponding to evaluation of combinabilityof the base component of the product, at least one evaluationinformation item corresponding to evaluation of necessity ornon-necessity of adjustment of the base component of the product, atleast one evaluation information item corresponding to evaluation ofcomponent sharability of the base component of the product and at leastone evaluation information item corresponding to evaluation of componentomittability of the product.
 19. The apparatus according to claim 18,wherein the at least one evaluation information item corresponding toevaluation of preparation for-the base component of the productcomprises an evaluation information item corresponding to evaluation ofposture change of the base component and an evaluation information itemcorresponding to evaluation of necessity or non-necessity of a jig forthe base component, wherein the at least one evaluation information itemcorresponding to evaluation of suppliability of the product comprises anevaluation information item corresponding to evaluation of posturechange of the product, an evaluation information item corresponding toevaluation of vulnerability of the product, an evaluation informationitem corresponding to evaluation of indefinite shape of the product, anevaluation information item corresponding to evaluation of an outlinefeature of the product and an evaluation information item correspondingto evaluation of entanglement of the product, wherein the at least oneevaluation information item corresponding to evaluation of holdabilitycomprises an evaluation information item corresponding to evaluation ofwhether a chuck is necessary for holding the product and an evaluationinformation item corresponding to evaluation of an amount of chuck spaceneeded for holding the product, wherein the at least one evaluationinformation item corresponding to evaluation of assemblability comprisesan evaluation information item corresponding to evaluation ofpositionability of the product, an evaluation information itemcorresponding to evaluation of direction of assembly of the product andan evaluation information item corresponding to evaluation of stabilityof the product, wherein the at least one evaluation information itemcorresponding to evaluation of combinability comprises an evaluationinformation item corresponding to evaluation of a number of tighteningscrews in an assembly process of the product, at least one evaluationinformation item corresponding to evaluation of a direction oftightening of at least one screw in the assembly process of the product,at least one evaluation information item corresponding to evaluation ofat least one place of tightening other than a place of tightening of theat least one tightening screw in the assembly process, an evaluationinformation item corresponding to an evaluation of a number oftightenings other than the tightening of the at least one tighteningscrew in the assembly process and at least one evaluation informationitem corresponding to evaluation of at least one direction of tighteningother than the tightening of the at least one tightening screw in theassembly process, wherein the at least one evaluation information itemcorresponding to evaluation of necessity or non-necessity of adjustmentcorresponds to evaluation of necessity or non-necessity of adjustmentsin the assembly process of the product, wherein the at least oneevaluation information item corresponding to evaluation of componentsharability comprises an evaluation information item corresponding toevaluation of manner for accomplishing sharability of components of theproduct, and wherein the at least one evaluation information itemcorresponding to evaluation of component omittability corresponds toevaluation of possibility that a component of the product can beomitted.
 20. The apparatus according to claim 12, wherein the evaluationcriteria comprises evaluation information items corresponding to thereverse assemblability which comprise at least one evaluationinformation item corresponding to disassemblability of the product, atleast one evaluation information item corresponding to classifiabilityof the product, at least one evaluation information item correspondingto reusability of the product and an evaluation information itemcorresponding to safety of the product.
 21. The apparatus according toclaim 20, wherein the at least one evaluation information itemcorresponding to evaluation of disassemblability comprises at least oneevaluation information item corresponding to evaluation ofde-combinability of the product, which comprises at least one evaluationinformation item corresponding to evaluation of at least one tighteningplace of the product, an evaluation information item corresponding toevaluation of pre-processing of the product, an evaluation informationitem corresponding to evaluation of post-processing of the product, anevaluation information item corresponding to evaluation of combinationtype of the product, an evaluation information item corresponding toevaluation of combination direction of the product, at least oneevaluation information item corresponding to evaluation of tighteningscrew sharability of the product and at least one evaluation informationitem corresponding to evaluation of tightening direction of tighteningscrews of the product, wherein the at least one evaluation informationitem corresponding to evaluation of classifiability of the productcomprises at least one evaluation information item corresponding toevaluation of component weight of the product, at least one evaluationinformation item corresponding to evaluation of number of the productand at least one evaluation information item corresponding to evaluationof material types of the product, wherein the at least one evaluationinformation item corresponding to an evaluation of component reusabilityof the product corresponds to an evaluation of possibility of reuse ofcomponents of the product, and wherein the evaluation information itemcorresponding to evaluation of safety of the product corresponds to anevaluation of whether any harmful substance is contained in the product.22. The apparatus according to claim 12, wherein the evaluation criteriacomprises assemblability evaluation information items corresponding toassemblability of the product and reverse-assemblability evaluationinformation items corresponding to reverse-assemblability of theproduct, wherein the assemblability evaluation information itemscomprise at least one evaluation information item corresponding toevaluation of preparation for a base component of the product, at leastone evaluation information item corresponding to evaluation ofsuppliability of the base component of the product, at least oneevaluation information item corresponding to evaluation of holdabilityof the base component of the product, at least one evaluationinformation item corresponding to evaluation of assemblability of thebase component of the product, at least one evaluation information itemcorresponding to evaluation of combinability of the base component ofthe product, at least one evaluation information item corresponding toevaluation of necessity or non-necessity of adjustment of the basecomponent of the product, at least one evaluation information itemcorresponding to evaluation of component sharability of the basecomponent of the product and at least one evaluation information itemcorresponding to evaluation of component omittability of the product,wherein the at least one evaluation information item corresponding toevaluation of preparation for the base component of the productcomprises an evaluation information item corresponding to evaluation ofposture change of the base component and an evaluation information itemcorresponding to evaluation of necessity or non-necessity of a jig forthe base component, wherein the at least one evaluation information itemcorresponding to evaluation of suppliability of the product comprises anevaluation information item corresponding to evaluation of posturechange of the product, an evaluation information item corresponding toevaluation of vulnerability of the product, an evaluation informationitem corresponding to evaluation of indefinite shape of the product, anevaluation information item corresponding to evaluation of outlinefeature of the product and an evaluation information item correspondingto evaluation of entanglement of the product, wherein the at least oneevaluation information item corresponding to evaluation of holdabilitycomprises an evaluation information item corresponding to evaluation ofwhether a chuck is necessary for holding the product and an evaluationinformation item corresponding to evaluation of an amount chuck spacefor holding the product, wherein the at least one evaluation informationitem corresponding to evaluation of assemblability comprises anevaluation information item corresponding to evaluation ofpositionability of the product, an evaluation information itemcorresponding to evaluation of direction of assembly of the product andan evaluation information item corresponding to evaluation of stabilityof the product, wherein the at least one evaluation information itemcorresponding to evaluation of combinability comprises an evaluationinformation item corresponding to evaluation of a number of tighteningscrews in an assembly process of the product, at least one evaluationinformation item corresponding to evaluation of a direction oftightening of at least one screw in the assembly process of the product,at least one evaluation information item corresponding to evaluation ofat least one place of tightening other than a place of tightening of theat least one tightening screw in the assembly process, an evaluationinformation item corresponding to an evaluation of a number oftightenings other than the tightening of the at least one tighteningscrew in the assembly process and at least one evaluation informationitem corresponding to evaluation of at least one direction of tighteningother than the tightening of the at least one tightening screw in theassembly process, wherein the at least one evaluation information itemcorresponding to evaluation of necessity or non-necessity of adjustmentcorresponds to evaluation of necessity or non-necessity of adjustmentsin the assembly process of the product, wherein the at least oneevaluation information item corresponding to evaluation of componentsharability corresponds to evaluation of how sharability of componentsof the product is accomplished, wherein the at least one evaluationinformation item corresponding to evaluation of component omittabilitycorresponds to evaluation of possibility that a component of the productcan be omitted, wherein the assemblability evaluation information itemscomprise at least one information item corresponding to evaluation ofdisassemblability, wherein the reverse-assemblability evaluationinformation items comprise at least one information item correspondingto evaluation of classifiability of the product, at least oneinformation item corresponding to evaluation of reusability of theproduct and an information item corresponding to evaluation of safety ofthe product, wherein the at least one evaluation information itemcorresponding to evaluation of disassemblability comprises at least oneevaluation information item corresponding to evaluation ofde-combinability of the product, which comprises at least one evaluationinformation item corresponding to evaluation of at least one tighteningplace of the product, an evaluation information item corresponding toevaluation of pre-processing of the product, an evaluation informationitem corresponding to evaluation of post-processing of the product, anevaluation information item corresponding to evaluation of combinationtype of the product, an evaluation information item corresponding toevaluation of combination direction of the product, at least oneevaluation information item corresponding to evaluation of tighteningscrew sharability of the product, and at least one evaluationinformation item corresponding to evaluation of tightening direction oftightening screws of the product, wherein the at least one evaluationinformation item corresponding to evaluation of classifiability of theproduct comprises at least one evaluation information item correspondingto evaluation of component weight of the product, at least oneevaluation information item corresponding to evaluation of number of theproduct and at least one evaluation information item corresponding toevaluation of material types of the product, wherein the at least oneevaluation information item corresponding to an evaluation of componentreusability of the product corresponds to an evaluation of possibilityof reuse of components of the product, wherein the evaluationinformation item corresponding to evaluation of safety of the productcorresponds to an evaluation of whether any harmful substance iscontained in the product, wherein said apparatus is operable to performan assemblability evaluation and a reverse-assemblability evaluationbased on the at least one evaluation information item corresponding toevaluation of combinability and said at least one evaluation informationitem corresponding to evaluation of component omittability, wherein theat least one evaluation information item corresponding to evaluation ofde-combinability of the product and the at least one evaluationinformation item corresponding to evaluation of classifiability of theproduct comprise at least one evaluation information item correspondingto evaluation of component weight and at least one evaluationinformation item corresponding to evaluation of number of material typesof the product, and wherein the at least one evaluation information itemcorresponding to evaluation of classifiability of the product and theleast one evaluation information item corresponding to evaluation ofsafety of the product comprise an evaluation information itemcorresponding to evaluation of material type of the product.
 23. Theapparatus according to claim 12, further comprising: an output devicethat is operable to output an assemblability evaluation result and areverse-assemblability evaluation result, wherein the assemblabilityevaluation result comprises at least one of a graph comprisinginformation corresponding to the assemblability evaluation, a table orgraph comprising information corresponding to structural characteristicsof the product, a table or graph comprising information corresponding toextraction of omittable components and a table or graph comprisinginformation corresponding to assembly man-hours, and wherein thereverse-assemblability evaluation result comprises at least one of aflow chart comprising information corresponding to the reverse-assemblyof the product, a graph comprising information corresponding toreverse-assemblability evaluation of the product, a table or graphcomprising information corresponding to extraction ofunnecessary-to-disassemble/reuse components of the product, a table orgraph comprising information corresponding to reverse-assembly man-hoursof the product, a table or graph comprising information corresponding touse amount of each material of the product and a table or graphcomprising information corresponding to rate of recyclability of theproduct.